The URL can be used to link to this page

2005-23a&sr2�3 Securities E 10, iM ij W 1' t. i W 7 th"ii'St 4S i '141 16 17 1's i itrii"iy'fs U i_9 0'ld'�i'4z t........ � 2s Notify Lori Haakt erry Jeffery 617/07 -Lori, status? Kim 6113/07 - Per Lori Haak, hold escrow for approximately 5 years (monitoring requirement set by MN Wetland Conservation Act) to ensure establishment of wetland characteristics. Check status 6/1/08. Kim 6/2/08 - Terry, FYI -please advise, Kim 7/1/08 -Terry. when would you like to be reminded of this? Kim 7/1$108 -'Ferry, status? Kim 7115108 - Per Terry Jeffery, notify him annuallyon May 1. 7/9/09 - Notified TerryJeffery. Check status 5/1110, Kim 511110 -Terry, status? Terry will review and give status update the wcck of 5/10/10. Kim 614110 - Notified Terry regarding status update. Kim 7/6110-Notified Terry regarding status update_ Kim 9117/10 - Notified Terry regarding status update. Kim 11119/10 -Notified Terryregarding status update. Kim 512111 -Notified Terry, Kim 6/6/ 11 -Notified Terry. Kim 6/ 13111 - Per Terry, ok to release escrow, Notified Finance to issue, check, Kim 6/16111 - Returned escrow with letter to Volk Minger Properties, LLC, Activity closed. Kim .... ......u....�.........................................................................................,...........................,,.............. ...,.............................. ........,....... .,..... ................ ......... ..,... ....... ,,...,.n................. .,..;....,............. ........ ,n...,....,.....,.....n....n.......,.......... n......,..,...u..n...,..... ................ ........................... .......... .............. .............. ..................... ........ ... ............. < ................y....... ., ... ................,.............. ..,.....rR..:.......... ...n..u..u..r.n..r......,.n........... r.... ......... ........ .o.............r.............................................. ....... .....n......................u....a...................,.....,...,... r......v. ............rn..... .....................u....... m.......rr..n.r.,............. r,.u..............,.,.......,....... .....,.................................. ..u............r.n...........u. ,.rr•a........,n .....,..n......,............................................ .........o..,,...,.. r n................. r.o......... .............,..u...............,...........,,.........u............................... ..........r...,....mm....u,...........ro.. r.. u.n..n.....r.,n,.......,w. m r..,..,. u............................................. r.•..r.... n....... mn............ ..r...................,..a+....,......... ra...u..,........,............................r,..nn... n.,o-..a.,.....,, n............................ ......,n...r....... ....... ............. . p...... nr• n •.........n.....r. r....,....n......[,......w.... n r....,...................,.....0.......... .,u.u.,.r,...........,,.....,,...,.....,......,.u. r.......... ,.......................,........................., m r,..rn........,........,,........ o....,.,......,....,..,. O t.*40ovekp rwt Corp, '1114WII A4]6 AM S-SWA P4YOr[y SCANNED Page 1 Administration Pfion %2.227.1100 Fax:952.227.1110 Building Inspections Phone-952.227.1180 Fax:952.227.1190 Engineering Phony 952227,1150 Fax; 952.227.1170 Finance P )0=952.227.1140 Fax:952227.1110 Park & Recreation Phow 952.227,1120 Fax: 952227,1110 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952.227.1400 Fax:952.227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources Phone:952227.1130 Fax:952,227.1110 Public Works 7901 Park Place Phow 952.227.1300 Fax:952.227.1310 Senior Center Phone:952.227.1125 Fax:952.227.1110 Web Site wwwAchanhassertm.us June 16, 2011 Volk Minger Properties, LLC c/o Pat Minger — 2218 Lukewood Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Release of Wetland Alteration Permit Escrow for Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 Dear Mr. Minger: Enclosed is a check in the amount of $2,200 which represents a release of the security escrow held by the City to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland were met. Please feel free to contact me at 952-227-1168 or tjeff_ ea&i.chanhassen.mmus if you have any questions. Sincerely, CITY Coordinator Enclosure c: Robert Generous, Senior Planner .. g1p1an12005 phming casms 05-23 cbxnhU= west businm park =ow rekase letter 6-16.11 _&oe Chanhassen is a Community for Life - Prmri FgIorTodayandPhnr&gtorTorrarrow 11' VAL'O Lit' 1:09 LOO L L 571: 0044G.-.47075E1' - Check Date: 6/16/2011 Check Amount: S2,200.00 Vendor No: VOLMIN Vendor Name: VOLK MINGER PROPERTIES Vendor Acct No: Invoice Number Date Description GL Account Amount 061311 6/13/2011 Security Escrow: Wetland Security Escro 815-8221-2024 2,200.00 Status Report 511/10 PLAN.0112 1 e r 16"Yl"1'13`14 i ir�4"16"11"17"lz£'i§ s sr"1"2"1§"i4"1$ is t65'lY"1e5"1�"2t5"�1 � �i"32'r,#"�"a' 23fi �'1�"i4" 20 21"2a gf Securities Oftcrip 5!1I10 511112 F Cash Escrow i Chanhassen West Business Park Wetland Alteration Permit 05-23 Planning Case 2005-23 SZ200 Wetland Security Escrow Receipt #6675 paid by Volk Minger Properties, LLC Notify Lori Haak 6/7107 - Lori. status? Kim 6113107 - Per Lori Haak, hold escrow for approximately5 years (monitoring requirement set by MN Wetland Conservation Act) to ensure establishment of wetland characteristics. Check status 611108. Kim QW8 - Terry, PYLplease advise. Kim 7/1108 -Terry. when would you like to be reminded of this? Kim 7/15/08-Terry, status? Kim 7/15/08 - Per Terry Jeffery, notify him annually on May 1. 7/9/09-Notified Terry Jeffery. Check status511110, Kim ; 0200aLoerOavdopmenlCoeV- MWO12"FA1 S-S1aas P-P" Pao&2 - . Meuwissen, Kim From: Jeffery, Terry Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2011 10,45 AM To: Meuwissen, Kim Subject: RE: Chanhassen West Business Park WAP 05-23 Wetland Security Escrow You can release this escrow. Thanks. From: Meuwissen, Kim Sent: Monday, June 06, 2011 10:39 AM To: Jeffery, Terry Subject: Chanhassen West Business Park WAP 05-23 Wetland Security Escrow Terry, Can this be release yet? KIM MEuwisam t CITY OF CHANHASSEN PLANNING SECRETARY 952-227-1 107 rYfAfLT�: KMF✓ISSF�hr�Cl. CNfih'N'ASSFI�f. Ml �1.115 IEEE= � I •i III 11111111 Cash Escrow Chanhassen West Business Park Wetland Alteration Permit 05-23 Planning Case 2005-23 $2,200 Wetiand Security Escrow Receipt #6675 paid by Volk Minger Properties, LLC . Notify Lori Haak/Terry Jeffery 617107 - Lori, status? Kim 6/ 3/07 -- Per Lori Haak, hold escrow for approximately 5 years (monitoring requirement set by MN Wetland 1 Conservation Act) to ensure establishment of wetland characteristics. Check status 6/1 /08. Kim 6/2/08 - Terry, FYI..please advise. Kim. 7/1/08 - Terry, when would you like to be reminded of this? Kim 7/15/08 -Terry, status? Kim 7/15/08 - Per Terry Jeffery, notify him annually on May 1. 7/9/09 - Notified Terry Jeffery. Check status 511 /1-0. Kim 5/1 /10 - Terry, status? Terry will review and give status update the week of 5/10/10. Kim 6/4/10 - Notified Terry regarding status update. Kim 7/6/10 - Notified Terry regarding status update. Kim 9/17/10 - Notified Terry regarding status update. Kim 11/18/10 - Notified Terry regarding status update. Kim 5/2/11 - Notified Terry. Kim 6/6/11 - Notified Terry. Kim z k � } i �r j. %; s Thomas J. Campbell Roger N. Knutson Thomas M. Scott Elliott B. Knetsch Joel J. Jamnik Andrea McDowell Poehler Soren M. Mattick John F. Kelly Henry A. Schaeffer, III Alina Schwartz Samuel J. Edmunds Cynthia R. Kirchoff Marguerite M. McCarron 1380 Corporate Center Curve Suite 317 • Eagan, MN 55121 651-452-5000 Fax 651-452-5550 www.ck-law.com G�r�3 CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association RECEIVE® Direct Dial. (651) 234-6222 JAN 2 2 2003 E-mailAddress. snelson®ck-law.com CITY OF CHANHASSEN January 17, 2008 Ms. Kim Meuwissen City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 RE: CHANHASSEN--MISC. RECORDED DOCUMENTS ➢ Wetland Alteration Permit 905-23 -- To Fill and Alter Wetlands Within Chanhassen West Business Park Dear Kim: Enclosed for the City's files please find original recorded Wetland Alteration Permit ##05-23 to fill and alter wetlands within Chanhassen West Business Park, which was recorded with the Carver County Recorder's office on May 11, 2007 as Abstract Document No. A464090. Regards, CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association BqS!an R. Nelson, Leg Assistant SRt :ms Enclosure SCANNED z m~ 0s ^O • y � mow• R i :� . k N s� ,s 3 I Document No. OFFICE OF THE A 4 640 90 COUNTY RECORDER CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA y Fee: S 46.00 Check#: 17308 Certified Recorded on 05-11-2007 at 01:30 ❑ AWPM 464090 1111111111111111111 CITY OF C1 IANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT #05-23 Carl . W so Jr: Cou my r er I. Permit. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the City of Chanhassen hereby grants a wetland alteration permit for the following use: To fill and alter wetlands within Chanhassen West Business Park, plans prepared by Schoell &Madsen, Inc., dated June 17, 2005. 2. P_ropert.Y. The permit is for property situated in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota, and legally described as follows: Chanhassen West Business Park 3. Conditions. The Wetland Alteration Permit was approved subject to the following conditions: A. A no loss determination shall be completed for Basin F 31-34. B. Exemption requests shall be completed for Basins F 51-80 N, Basin F 91-97 and Wetland A. C. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). A Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application. Form for Water/Wetland Projects (Parts I and II) shall be submitted for the proposed project. The application shall include sequencing discussions and sequencing flexibility requests, if applicable. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. D. A five-year wetland replacement monitoring plan shall be submitted. The replacement monitoring plan shall include a detailed management plan for invasive non-native species, particularly purple loosestrife and reed canary grass. The plans shall show fixed photo monitoring points for the replacement wetland. The applicant shall provide proof of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland. 011�� SCANNED E. Several corrections must be made to the Wetland Mitigation Plan (sheet 10 of 13): I. Weiland A is shown as an impact area. Upon finalization of exemption paperwork, mitigation will not be required for this wetland; 2. Wetland C (Basin F 87-90) is 0.05 acres in area; and 3. Wetland (Basin F 81-86) is 0.09 acres in area. F. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. G. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. H. Drainage and utility easements a minimum of 20 feet in width shall be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used as PVC and storm water ponds. I. Silt fence shall be installed around Outlot. A along the east side between the pond the wetland. J. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase H construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval. 4. Termination of Permit. The City may revoke the permit following a public hearing for violation of the terms of this permit. 5. Lapseif within one year of the issuance of this permit the authorized construction has not been substantially completed or the use commenced, this permit shall lapse, unless an extension is granted in accordance with the Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance. 6. CriminalPenalty. Violation of the terms of this conditional use permit is a criminal misdemeanor. Dated: August 22, 2005 SCANNED STATE OF MWNESOTA (ss COUNTY OF CARVER CITY OF CHANHASSEN B y: Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor---,,., By: T dd Gerhardt, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me thisday of 20.L1, by Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor and Todd Gerhardt, City Manager, of the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to authority granted by its City Council. DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 . � a a` KAREN I ENGELHARDT Notary Public -Minnesota MY Cwr� EX*ft Jan 31, 2010 SCANNED ia�M2000 .Wm �YSep;EP20DU7 T FS ,M I-ss 2 3 4 T �7 ldlil I U 14 1 -Ili- 28 24-30 31 R Ef Securities Ulm F Cash Escrow Chanhassen West Business Park Wetland Alteration Permit 0.5-23 Planning Case 2005.23 $2.200 Wetland Security Escrow Receipt #6675 paid by Volk Minga Properties, LLC Notify Lori Haak C2007Lola De,eft~CoryL Z-AW A 2.a9 PM &&Am P-P"*/ SCA14NED Pap I NEWDOC s V CITY OF CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 FAX (952) 227-11 0 TO: Campbell Knutson, PA 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, MN 55121 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE JOB NO. 3/12/07 12005-23 ATTENTION Sue Nelson RE: Document Recording WE ARE SENDING YOU ® Attached ❑ Under separate cover via the following items: ❑ Shop drawings ❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Samples ❑ Specifications ❑ Copy of letter ❑ Change Order ❑ Pay Request ❑ COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION 1 8/22/05 05-23 1 Wetland Alteration Permit 2005-23 THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ❑ For approval ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Resubmit copies for approval ❑ For your use ❑ Approved as noted ❑ Submit copies for distribution ❑ As requested ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ Return corrected prints ❑ For review and comment ® For Recording ❑ FORBIDS DUE ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS COPY TO: SIGN in eums en, (952) 227-1107 if enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once. $CAN HP.f,1 ;i CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MDR400TA Eli coI W.-I yr lil-i_MAW63 z 19 L1 0t 1. Permit. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the City of Chanhassen hereby grants a wetland alteration permit for the following use: To fill and alter wetlands within Chanhassen West Business Park, plans prepared by Schoell & Madsen, Inc., dated June 17, 2005. 2. Propel. The permit is for property situated in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota, and legally described as follows: Chanhassen West Business Park 3. Conditions. The Wetland Alteration Permit was approved subject to the following conditions: A. A no loss determination shall be completed for Basin F 31-34. B. Exemption requests shall be completed for Basins F 51-80 N, Basin F 91-97 and Wetland A. C. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). A Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for Water/Wetland Projects (Parts I and.11) shall be submitted for the proposed project. The application shall include sequencing discussions and sequencing flexibility requests, if applicable. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. D. A five-year wetland replacement monitoring plan shall be submitted. The replacement monitoring plan shall include a detailed management plan for invasive non-native species, particularly purple loosestrife and reed canary grass. The plans shall show fixed photo monitoring points for the replacement wetland. The applicant shall provide proof of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland. E. Several corrections must be made to the Wetland Mitigation Plan (sheet '10 of 13): 1. Wetland A is shown as an impact area. Upon finalization of exemption paperwork, mitigation will not be required for this wetland; 2. Wetland C (Basin F 87-90) is 0.05 acres in area; and 3. Wetland D (Basin F 81-86) is 0.09 acres in area. F. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must, pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. G. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement - wetland are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no Iess than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. H. Drainage and utility easements a minimum of 20 feet in width shall be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used as PVC and storm water ponds. I. Silt fence shall be installed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond the wetland. J. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase 11 construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval. 4. Termination of Pennit. The City may revoke the permit following a public hearing for violation of the terms of this permit. 5. Lapse. If within one year of the issuance of this permit the authorized construction has not been substantially completed or the use commenced, this permit shall lapse, unless an extension is granted in accordance with the Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance. 6. Criminal Penalty. Violation of the terms of this conditional use permit is a criminal misdemeanor. _ Dated: August .22, 2005 i CITY OF CHANHAS SEN By: Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor^----,j .SEAL T dd Gerhardt, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA } (ss COUNTY OF CARVER The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this % day of 20.91, by Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor and Todd Gerhardt, City Manager, of the City of Chanhassen, aMinnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to authority granted by its City Council. 'A KAREN J. ENGEL MRDT Fr _ Notary Public -Minnesota ti17I cwrissm FxaresJan $1, 2010 ' DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 i �� NEWDOC Z m O.m. • NEWDOC 4 MOP CMIMSEN 7700 Marks Boule M POBx147 C1'grih=eri, MN 55317 Administration ftm %2227.1100 Fax %2.227.1110 Building Inspections P1lz952227.11M. I=952,227.1190 Engineering RM 952227.1160 Fax %M7.1170 Finance MM952.227.1140 Fax 952227.1110 _Park & Recreation Phone: %M7.1120 Fax 952227.1110 Reaeft Ceft 2310 CoU'er BouLyad fte: %2227.1400 Fax %M7,1404 Planning & Natural Resources _ Ft t o r x: 952, 221.1130 Fk%2227.1110 Public Works 1591 Park RW i 952227,1300 Fax W 227.1310 Senior Center ftM W227.1125 Fax 952.227.1110 Web Site April 4, 2006 Mr. Pat Minger Minger Construction 8470 Galpin Blvd. Chanhassen, M 55317 Re: Outlot C, Chanhassen West Business Center Dear Mr. Minger, According to submitted development plans apprn C in the Chanhassen West Business Center is an limits to any activity. Since the last fall, I have l on site to eliminate the continuing encroachmeni equipment is `still accessingthe outlot. and mate` This continuing lack of cornpl>rance, causing;ti and is unacceptable - You must remove. It protection fcncing4 outlot also by April stop work order bel insure. compliance s`store. wit. properly ins g posted for the er City Council, Outlot preservation and off g,with Steve Wilson yea .To date, ;being.'stored there. vithinAa protected area Th a City 0f Chanhassen • A gfWq c wxff4 with clean lakes, quality sclu *, a ftmiing downtown, thriving busmmes, winding trails, and healthful parks. A gnat place to live, work, and play. os- C -3 0 CITY OF CENSEN 77WMMBwI=d PO Box 147 Ct .M.HW17 ; Administration Ove952227.1100 Pax 952227.1110 Building Inspections fte %2.227.1180 Fax 952,227.1190 Engineering P1=%M7.1160 Fax %2227.1170 Finance Pt= 952227.1140 Fat 952227.1110 Park & Recreation PIM 952227.1120 Fax 952271.1t10 Reaeft Cerda 2310Co4la8ar11 ad R=95M7.1400 Fax 952227.1404 • April 7, 2006 Community Bank Chanhassen Carver County Abstract & Title 455 Pond Promenade 411 North Chestnut Street P. O. Box 1177 Chaska, MN 55318 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Minger Construction 2471 Galpin Court Lot 4, Block 2, Chanhassen West Business Park (the "Project") Ladies and Gentlemen: This office has been requested to confirm certain facts and circumstances concerning the current zoning and land use and building code compliance status of the above referenced project. In furtherance of that request, we hereby confirm and advise you as follows, to wit: 1. The above referenced Project is located within the corporate limits of the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota. Accordingly, the building and other improvements comprising the project are under the jurisdiction and are required to complywith the building codes, ordinances and regulations of the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota. 2. The Project currently is located in a. district with zoning classification of Planning & Natural Resources Planned Unit Development, 'PUD, and a comprehensive plan designation of p � p p � . P=952227.1130 Office/industrial. The zoning classification is consistent with the F=9 2.221.1110 comprehensive plan designation. Public works 1591 Pa RUI 3. The use of the Project for office -warehouse use is a permitted use under the %2227.1300 aforesaid zoning classification and is consistent with the aforesaid Fax 952227,1310 comprehensive plan designation. Senior Center 952.227.1125 4. The Project use, as described above, complies with the above stated current Fax952.227.tt10 zoning classification and all current zoning requirements and regulations Web site applicable thereto, including parking requirements, and also complies with the wwavAdffh-%Kff Ilus above stated comprehensive plan designation and all requirements applicable thereto. 5. The improvement to the Project as set forth in Planning Case #05-27 were approved on September 29, 2005, by the Chanhassen City Council for a 46,152 square -foot office warehouse building, plans prepared by Schoell and Madson, Inc., dated August 5, 2005, revised September 12, 2005. The City of Chanhassen • A grc iq co=rayniiywiih clean takes, quality sfals, a dtnirg bvAom thr'Wng businesses, wind iQ Ua''ls.2n4 beautiful parks. A pat place to live, worst, and play Chanhassen Community Bank Carver County Abstract & Title Lot 4, Block 1, Chanhassen West Business Park April 7, 2006 Page 2 6. The Project complies with the subdivision ordinances affecting it and can be conveyed without the filing of a plat or replat of the Project. 7. The Project is located in Flood Zone C, which is not an area of high hazard for flooding and is considered an area of minimal flooding, Community Panel Number 2700510005 B, effective July 2,1979. 7. All utility services, in adequate capacity for the Project, are available to said property including water, sanitary sewer, storm water, gas, electric, and telephone. Should additional information be required of this office concerning the project, you may contact the undersigned. Sincere r ' Robert Generous, AICP Senior Planner gAplan12005 planning cases105-27 minM construction site planVoning letter.doc 0 COMMUNITY BANK CHANHASSEN OFFICE 455 Pond Promenade • PO Box 1177 • Chanhassen, MN W17.952-M-2265 • Fax: 95=7-2324 • &mail: mail@cbchanhassen.00m April 6, 2006 City of Chanhassen Attention: Mr. Robert Generous Senior Planner 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Hand -delivered RE: Zoning letter. Dear Mr. Generous: I am writing to request a zoning letter for the construction of the building planned at Lot 4, Block 2 of the Chanhassen West Business Park. Please verify .for us that the building site is properly zoned for the intended use as a commercial building and that the plans have been duly approved by the City council. Also I would like confirmation that city utilities sufficient to serve the building are available at the property boundary. Please address the letter to Community Bank Corporation and also to Carver County Abstract & Title Company, who is providing a zoning endorsement to the bank. Thanks in advance for your assistance; we appreciate your help in this matter. Please find attached a check in the amount of $25.00 for your fee. Please phone when the letter is ready and I will come over and pick it up. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me directly at (952) 227-2405. Respectfully, h Thomas J. Hughes Assistant Vice President Community Bank Corporation Chanhassen Office An Office of Community Bank Corporation �w m �— o�. T • 1 a 111111111111111111 NEWDOC NE.WDOC r s � schoell & Madson, Inc. -�- Planning* Engineering • Surveying TO: City of Chanhassen DATE: 9-29-05 1 PROJECT NO.: 62641-047 7700 Market Blvd ATTENTION: Bob Generous PO Box 147 SUBJECT: Chanhassen West Business Park Chanhassen, MN 55317 We are sending you ® herewith ❑ under separate cover the following: ® Plans ❑ Specifications ❑ Prints ®Reports ❑ Shop Drawings ❑ Change Order ❑ Samples ® Copy of a Letter ❑ Data Sheets ❑ Other Transmitted via: ❑Mail ❑ Fax ❑ Wiil Call ® 1 Hr. Messenger Service ❑ Overnight Delivery QUANTITY DESCRIPTION 1 Response letter to Ci comments dated 9-6-05 2 Sets overall site plans 2 Sets public construction plans These are transmitted as follows: ❑ As Requested ❑ For Your Records ❑ For Your Use ® For Review and Comment REMARKS: Full submittal sent to Mak Sweiden with engineering reports and diagrams. Please contact Jegy Backman at 952-847-9620 with a ny questions SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. Jared Jones Direct Dial No. 952-847-9608 Copy To CM OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED SEP 3 0 2005 CUMMI PLMMNG DEFT GITY of aECE veo<s s 5EP 3 0 ZOO 10580 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 1,- Minneapolis, MN 55305 G,,,,,ASSENVLpN%t%G01EPT Office 952-546-7601 • Fax 952-546-9065 www.schoelimadson.com F:IENG%6264lkD471correspondencok0ty Submittal 9.29-05\Transmittal -Bob Generous 9-30.doc os �3 09 CITY OF MHSSEN T1Wl+AarketiiWftd PO Box 147 Uwh= ri, MN 55317 Administration Phoney 952227.1100 Fax:952227.1110 Building Inspections PhOW 952227.1180 Fax:952227.1190 Engineering H14W%W7.1160 F=%2.227.1170 Finance Pt=952227.1140 Fa)c 952227.1110 Park & Recreation Kax-952227,1120 Fax 952227.1110 Reaeaticn ceu 2310 Coffer BwVad Pt e%2.227.1400 Fat 952.227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources ft*rie:952227.1F30 Fax 952.221,1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Pt 952.227.130) F;M 952.227.1310 Senior Center H=952227.1125 Fat%2M.1110 Web Site wwxci.enntws September 30, 2005 Mir. Mark'Undestad Eden Trace Corporation 8156 Mallory Court Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Final Plat Approval - Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case #05-23 Dear Mark: This letter is to confirm that on September 29, 2005 the Chanhassen City Council approved the following: Final Plat for Chanhassen West BusinessPark creating glots, 3 outlots and associated right-of-way for public streets (plans prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc., dated September 6, 2005), subject to the following conditions: The City of Chanhassen • A growirg corrrnu 4 with clean lakes. quality sftA a dwr iV mown, thriving Wmesses, rr`mding Frans, xA beautiful parks. A great place to live, work, W play. Mr. Mark Undestad Final Plat Approval - Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 September 30, 2005 Page 2 of 7 applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. 7. Stable emergency overflows shall be provided for the proposed pond on site. The emergency overflows shall be clearly labeled on the plan and a detail is needed. The emergency overflows may be stabilized with a turf re -enforcement mat or fabric and riprap. 8. Notes on the plan describing timing of temporary stabilization with Type 1 mulch and seed or erosion control blanket and seed shall be included. The notes shall include timing of stabilization as well as the rate of mulch application (2 tons per acre, disc anchored). 9. All riprap/fabric at the flared end section shall be installed within 24 hours of flared end section installation. 10. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of Slope Time (Maximum time an area can Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area 10:1 to 3.1 14 days is not actively being worked.) Flatter than 10:1 21 days These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water. 11. Erosion control blanket shall be specified in the swale from the flared end section to the wetland along the west boundary of the site. The blanket specified shall adequately protect the area from designed velocity and depth of flow. The blanket and seed in the swale shall be installed within 5 days of culvert installation. Erosion control blanket is recommended for the pond slopes from around 952 to 942 contours. All blanket on the plan shall be shown as a shaded area. 12. Temporary sediment basins shall be installed prior to disturbing upslope areas. The areas of temporary sediment basins shall be labeled on the plan. A temporary outlet (e.g., a perforated riser and rock cone) shall be provided for the pond; details should be provided. Temporary basins shall be constructed in the area of the proposed permanent storm water pond, the southeast corner of the site prior to discharging to the culvert under Galpin Boulevard, and possibly in the northwest area of the site to handle water runon from the north prior to discharge to the wetland. 13. Any and all area inlets or drop inlets in paved areas shall be protected with alternate controls/Wimco details. The engineer shall research and provide alternate designs for 43HI 3 Mr. Mark Undestad Final Plat Approval - Chanhassen WestBusiness Park Planning Case 05-23 September 30, 2005 Page 3 of 7 Wimco-type inlet controls to fit the various types of inlets 14. Additional inlet controls shall be provided for adjacent inlets on Galpin Boulevard and Galpin Court. 15. Silt fence shall be installed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond and the wetland. 16. Type 1 and Type 2 silt fence locations shall be specified on the plan. Type 2 silt fence shall be installed around all wetland areas and in the southeast corner of the site to protect the culvert under Galpin Boulevard. The silt fence shall be extended along the south side to close the gap in the silt fence. 17. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. 18. The total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $301,493.29. 19. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase H construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval. 20. In lieu of parkland dedication and trail construction, full park fees shall be collected at the rate in force at the time of final plat for the proposed Chanhassen West Business Park. At current rates, the park fee would total $359,500 (35.95 x $10,000 per acre). 21. A demolition permit must be obtained before beginning demolition of any existing structures. 22. A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. 23. Fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for fire protection is required to be installed. Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction except when approved alternate methods of protection are provided. 24. No burning permits will be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. ' 25. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed load of fire apparatus and shall be surfaced so as to provide all weather driving capabilities. Pursuant to Minnesota Fire code Section 503.2.3. Mr. Mark Undestad Final Plat Approval - Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 September 30, 2005 Page 4 of 7 26. Temporary street signs shall be installed on street intersections when construction of a new roadway allows passage be vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota fire code Section 501.4. 27. Prior to construction, storm sewer design data will need to be submitted with drainage map for staff review. Depending on the size of the drainage area, additional catch basins may be required at that time. The storm sewer will have to be designed for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility casements will need to be dedicated on the final plat over the public storm drainage system including storm water ponds, drainage swales, emergency overflows, access routes for maintenance, over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, and buffer areas used as PVC. The minimum easement width shall be 20 feet wide. 28. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. 29. Show minimum 30-foot utility easement between Lots 4 and 5, Block 2 along the private . driveway from sanitary MH #6 to MH #8. 30. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. 31.On the site plan: a. Revise the cul-de-sac pavement radius to 48 feet. b. Revise the parking driveway aisle from 24 feet to 26 feet wide. c. Revise the public street width from 32 feet to 36 feet wide. d. Increase the full access width off Galpin Boulevard to 44 feet and create three lane access. e. Shift Lots 1 and 8 easterly access further toward the west and realign them across from each other. f. Show at least one, 6-foot wide, side walk along the public street and pedestrian curb ramps. g. Show the access off Galpin Boulevard turning curb radius. h. Realign Lot 5, Block 2 access perpendicular to the shared driveway. i. Show handicap parking spots and ramps. j. Show concrete driveway apron at every lot access per detail #5207. 32.On the grading plan: a. Extend silt fence between the storm pond and Outlot A. Silt fence Type 11 must be used adjacent to wetlands and storm pond. b. Revise contour lines to match 3:1 maximum slope and tie the proposed contour lines with the existing contours for Lots 4, 5, Block 2, south of Lot 2, Block 1, and northeast of Lot 1, Block 2. c. Show the proposed contour lines for Lot 3, Block 1. d. Show all retaining walls top and bottom elevations. 1 Mr. Mark Undestad Final Plat Approval - Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 September 30, 2005 Page 5 of 7 c. Show all emergency overflows (EOF). The EOF must be 1.5' lower than the adjacent lowest floor. f. Revise Lot 3, Block 1 parking slope to 0.7% minimum. g. Add a note to remove any existing structure and access off Galpin Boulevard and Lyman Boulevard. All disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. h. Show 75-foot minimum construction rock entrance. i. No retaining walls structure is allowed within public street and/or public utility easements, revise accordingly. j. Show contour lines for the berm on Outlot B. 33.On the utility plans: a. Show 20-foot proposed drainage and utility easements between Lots 2 and 3, .Block 2. b. Show the proposed sanitary and storm sewer stubs inverts. c. Add storm sewer schedule. . d. Public storm sewer pipe type must be RCP and 15-inch minimum diameter. e. The last street accessible storm manhole (STMH#2) must be built with a sump. f. On the utility profile show all sewer and pipe crossings. g. Minimum vertical separation must be 18 inches between watermain and sewer. h. Call out watermain fittings i. Add the outlet control structure per detail #3109. 34. Any retaining wall over four feet in height must be designed by a registered. Civil Engineer in the state of Minnesota with an approved safety fence on top of it. Also, it will require a building permit from the Building Department. 35. Add the following City of Chanhassen latest Detail Plate Nos. 1001,1002, 1003, 2109, 2110, 22019 2204, 2205, 3104, 5201, 5205, 5214, 5215, 5216, 5217, 5221, 5232, 5240, 5241, 5242, 5302 and 5313. 36. Prior to final plat approval, a professional civil engineer registered in the state of Minnesota must sign all plans. 37. Storm pond is required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. Submit drainage calculations for staff review. 38. Cross -access easements for the shared driveway accesses must be obtained and recorded against the lots for each of the entrance drives. 39. Any off -site grading will require easements from the appropriate property owner. 40. Public utility improvements will be required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required at the time of final platting. The applicant will also be required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary Mr. Mark Undestad Final Plat Approval - Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 September 30, 2005 Page 6 of 7 financial security in the form of a letter of creditor cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. The applicant must be aware that all public utility improvements will require a preconstruction meeting before building permit issuance. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. 41. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes and traffic control plans. The applicant should be aware that any off -site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. 42. All private streets are required to have 26-foot wide paved streets from back -of -curb to back - of -curb, be built to a 9-ton design and contained within a 40-foot wide private easement. At the completion of the project, the developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 9-ton design. 43. All of the proposed building pads must have a rear yard elevation at least three feet above the HWL of the adjacent ponds. 44. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's Building Department. 45. Comply with Carver County memo dated June 28, 2005 and revise the plans accordingly. 46. Revise plan sheet size to 24 x 36 using scale 50. 47. The developer shall dedicate a permanent conservation easement over Outlot C. 48. The applicant shall work with staff to resolve any drainage issues along Lots 5, 6 and Outlot C. 49. The developer shall construct a berm within the 16 foot setback outside the wetland buffer zone on Lot 5. 50. Revise the construction plans to correspond with the final plat lot designations 51. Approval of the final plat is contingent upon approval of final construction plans/specifications for the project along with the developer entering into a development contract with the City and supplying the necessary financial security and fees. 52. The developer shall pay the $121,960.80 Arterial Collector Fee. 53. The developer shall work with the City of Chaska to accommodate storm water froin properties to the west of the project site." Mr. Mark Undestad , Final Plat Approval - Chanhassen West Business Park PIanning Case 05-23 September 30, 2005 Page 7 of 7 Two signed mylar copies of the final plat shall be submitted to our office for signatures along with the signed development contract (enclosed) and conservation easement, the required financial security required by the development contract ($705,430.00) and the administrative fees in the amount of $467,832.49. Two 1"=200' scale mylar reductions of the final plat and one 1"=200' scale mylar reductions of the final plat with just street names and lot and block numbers shall be submitted. In addition, a digital copy in .dxf format and a digital copy in .tif format (pdf compatible) of the final plat shall be submitted. The City will submit all the necessary documents to Carver County for recording of the • subdivision. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (952) 227-1131. Si y Robert Generous, AICP Senior Planner Enclosures ec: Alyson Morris, Assistant City Engineer Steve Torell, .Building Official c: Patrick Minger r.Vbn12005 planning cases105 23 chanhassm west business parMapproval letter final plst.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS PARK DEVELOPMENT- CONTRACT (Developer Installed Improvements) TABLE OF CONTENTS SPECIAL PROVISIONS PAGE 1. REQUEST FOR PLAT APPROVAL............................................................................SP-1 2. CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL .......................................................... .........SP-1 . 3. DEVELOPMENT PLANS .................. .......................................................................... SP-1 4. IMPROVEMENTS........................................................................................................SP-2 5. TIME OF PERFORMANCE.........................................................................................SP-2 6. SECURITY....................................................................................................................SP-2 7. NOTICE.........................................................................................................................SP-3 8. OTHER SPECIAL CONDITIONS ............................. ..................... .......... ................SP-3 9. GENERAL CONDITIONS ................................................ ................... .....SP-9 .... ................ GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. RIGHT TO PROCEED.................................................................................................GC-1 2. PHASED DEVELOPMENT.........................................................................................GC-1 3. PRELRVIINARY PLAT STATUS................................................................................GG1 4. CHANGES IN OFFICIAL CONTROLS......................................................................GC-1 5. IMPROVEMENTS........................................................... ..GC-1 .......................................... 6.- IRON MONUMENTS..................................................................................................GC-2 7. LICENSE......................................................................................................................GC-2 8. SITE EROSION CONTROL........................................................................................GC-2 8A. EROSION CONTROL DURING CONSTRUCTION OF A DWELLING OR OTHER BUILDING..........................................................................................:......................... GC-2 9. CLEAN UP..................................................................................................................GC-3 10. ACCEPTANCE AND OWNERSHIP OF IMPROVEMENTS....................................GC-3 11. CLAIMS........................................................................................................................GC-3 12. PARK DEDICATION......................................................................... .....................GC-3 13. LANDSCAPING..........................................................................................................GC-3 14. WARRANTY...............................................................................................................GC-4 15. LOT PLANS.......................................................................................... ..GC-4 ..................... 16. EXISTING ASSESSMENTS.......................................................................................GC-4 17. HOOK-UP CHARGES.................................................................................................GC-4 18. PUBLIC STREET LIGHTING.....................................................................................GC-4 19. SIGNAGE.....................................................................................................................GC-5 20. HOUSE PADS..............................................................................................................GC-5 21. RESPONSIBILITY FOR COSTS.................................................................................GC-5 ., 22. DEVELOPER'S DEFAULT........................................................................................GC-6 22. MISCELLANEOUS A. Construction Trailers.......................................................................................GC-6 B. Postal Service....................................................................................................GC-6 C. Third Parties......................................................................................................GC-7 i D. Breach of Contract................................................................... .....................GC-7 E. Severability.................. :....................................................................................GC-7 F. Building Permits.................................................................... GC-7 G. Waivers/Amendments.......................................................................................GC-7 H. Release..............................................................................................................GC-7 I. Insurance...........................................................................................................GC-7 J. Remedies...........................................................................................................GC-7 K. Assignability.....................................................................................................GC-8 L. Construction Hours...........................................................................................GC-8 M. Noise Amplification..........................................................................................GC-8 N. Access...............................................................................................................GC-8 O. Street Maintenance.............................................................................................GC-8 P. Storm Sewer Maintenance................................................................................GC-8 Q. Soil Treatment Systems....................................................................................GC-9 R. Variances...........................................................................................................GC-9 S. Compliance with Laws, Ordinances, and Regulations......................................GC-9 T. Proof of Title.....................................................................................................GC-9 U. Soil Conditions ............................. .................................................................... GC-9 V. Soil Correction..................................................................................................GC-9 W. Haul Routes.........................................................................................................GC-10 X. Development Signs..............................................................................................GC-10 Y. Construction Plans...............................................................................................GC-10 Z. As -Built Lot Surveys...........................................................................................GC-10 ii CITY OF CHANHASSEN DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT (Developer Installed Improvements) CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS PARK PECIAL PROVISIONS AGREEMENT dated September 29, 2005 by and between the CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the "City"), and, EDEN TRACE CORPORATION (the "Developer"). 1. Request for Plat Approval. The Developer has asked the City to approve a plat for Chanhassen West Business Park (referred to in this Contract as the "plat"). The land is legally described on the attached Exhibit "A". 2. Conditions of Plat Approval. The City hereby approves the plat on condition that the Developer enter into this Contract, furnish the security required by it, and record the plat with the County Recorder or Registrar of Titles within 30 days after the City Council approves the plat. 3. Development Plans. The plat shall be developed in accordance with the following Plans. The plans shall not be attached to this Contract. With the exception of Plan A, the plans may be prepared, subject to City approval, after entering the Contract, but before commencement of any work in the plat. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Contract, the written terms shall control. The plans are: Plan A: Final plat approved September 29, 2005, prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Plan B: Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan dated September 6, 2005, prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Plan C: Plans and Specifications for Improvements dated September 6, 2005, prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Plan D: Landscape Plan dated September 6, 2005, prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. SP-1 4. Improvements. The Developer shall install and pay for the following: A. Sanitary Sewer System B. Water System C. Storm Water Drainage System D. Streets E. Concrete Curb and Gutter F. Street Lights G. Site Grading/Restoration H. Underground Utilities (e.g. gas, electric, telephone, CATV) 1. Setting of Lot and Block Monuments J. Surveying and Staking K. Landscaping L. Erosion Control 5. Time of Performance. The Developer shall install all required improvements by November 15, 2005. The Developer may, however, request an extension of time from the City. If an extension.is granted, it shall be conditioned upon updating the security posted by the Developer to reflect cost increases and the extended completion date. 6. Security. To guarantee compliance with the terms of this Contract, payment of special assessments, payment of the costs of all public improvements, and construction of all public improvements, the Developer shall furnish the City with a letter of credit in the form attached hereto, from a bank acceptable to the City, or cash escrow ("security") for $705,430.00. The amount of the security was calculated as 110% of the following: Site Grading/Restoration Sanitary Sewer Watermain Storm Sewer, Drainage System, including cleaning and maintenance Streets Street lights and signs Erosion control Engineering, surveying, and inspection Landscaping $ 138,000.00 $ 46,000.00 $ 43,200.00 $ 78,000.00 $_„ 55,200.00 $ 18,000.00 $ 31.900.00 $-.170,000.00 SP-2 TOTAL COST OF PUBLIC 1WROVEMENTS $ _ This breakdown is for historical reference; it is not a restriction on the use.of the security. The security shall be subject to the approval of the City. The City may draw down the security, without notice, for any violation of the terms of this Contract. If the required public improvements are not completed at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the security, the City may also draw it down. If the security is drawn down, the draw shalt be used to cure the default. With City approval, the security may be reduced from time to time as financial obligations are paid, but in no case shall the security be reduced to a point less than 10% of the original amount until (1) all improvements have been completed, (2) iron monuments for lot corners have been installed, (3) all financial obligations to the City satisfied, (4) the required "record' plans have been received by the City, (5) a warranty security is provided, and (b) the public improvements are accepted by the City. 7. Notice. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by registered mail at the following address: Eden Trace Corporation 8156 Mallory Court Chanhassen, MN 55317 Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand delivered to the City Manager, or mailed to the City by registered mail in care of the City Manager at the following address: Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317, Telephone (952) 227-1100. . 8. Other Special Conditions. A. The applicant shall enter into the development contract and supply the City with a cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of $705,430.00 and pay an administration fee of - $467,832.49. B. The applicant's engineer shall work with City staff in revising the construction plans to meet city standards: C. Applicant shall increase landscape plantings in the south and east property line bufferyards to meet minimum requirements. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted before final approval. D. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to any construction activities. Fencing shall remain in place until construction is completed. I SP-3 E. All trees shown as preserved on plans dated 6117/05 shall be protected. Any trees damaged or removed shall be replaced at a rate of 2:1 diameter inches. F. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. G. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. H. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. I. Stable emergency overflows shall be provided for the proposed pond on site. The emergency overflows shall be clearly labeled on the plan and a detail is needed. The emergency overflows may be stabilized with a turf re -enforcement mat or fabric and riprap. I Notes on the plan describing timing of temporary stabilization with Type 1 mulch and seed or erosion control blanket and seed shall be included. The notes shall include timing of stabilization as well as the rate of mulch application (2 tons per acre, disc anchored). K. All riprap/fabric at the flared end section shall be installed within 24 hours of flared end section installation. L. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of Slope Time (Maximum time an area can Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area 10:1 to 3:1 14 days is not actively being worked.) Flatter than 10:1 21 days These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man made systems SP-4 that discharge to a surface water. M.. Erosion control blanket shall be specified in the swale from the flared end section to the wetland along the west boundary of the site. The blanket specified shall adequately protect the= area from designed velocity and depth of flow. The blanket and seed in the swale shall be installed within 5 days of culvert installation. Erosion control blanket is recommended for the pond slopes from around 952 to 942 contours. All blanket on the plan shall be shown as a shaded area. N. Temporary sediment basins shall be installed prior to disturbing upslope areas. The areas . of temporary sediment basins shall be labeled on the plan. A temporary outlet (e.g., a perforated riser and rock cone) shall be provided for the pond; details should be provided. Temporary basins shall be constructed in the area of the proposed permanent storm water pond, the southeast corner of the site prior to discharging to the culvert under Galpin Boulevard, and possibly in the northwest area of the site to handle water runon from the north prior to discharge to the wetland. O. Any and all area inlets or drop inlets in paved areas shall be protected with alternate controlslWimco details. The engineer shall research and provide alternate designs for Wimco- type inlet controls to fit the various types of inlets. P. Additional inlet controls shall be provided for adjacent inlets on Galpin Boulevard and Galpin Court. Q. Silt fence shall be installed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond and the wetland. R. Type 1 and Type 2 silt fence locations shall be specified on the plan. Type 2 silt fence shall be installed around all wetland areas and in the southeast corner of the site to protect. the culvert under Galpin Boulevard. The silt fence shall be extended along the south side to close the gap in the silt fence. S. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. T. The total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $301,493.29. U. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase II construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval. V. In lieu of parkland dedication and trail construction, full park fees shall be collected at the rate in force at the time of final plat for the proposed Chanhassen West Business Park. At SP-5 current rates, the park fee would total $359,500 (35.95 x $10,000 per acre). W. A demolition permit must be obtained before beginning demolition of any existing structures. X. A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. Y. Fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for fire protection is required to be installed. Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction except when approved alternate methods of protection are provided. Z. No burning permits will be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. AA. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed load of fire apparatus and shall be surfaced so as to provide all weather driving capabilities. Pursuant to Minnesota Fire code Section 503.2.3. BB. Temporary street signs shall be installed on street intersections when construction of a new roadway allows passage be vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota fire code Section 501.4. CC. Prior to construction, storm sewer design data will need to be submitted with drainage map for staff review. Depending on the size of the drainage area, additional catch basins may be required at that time. The storm sewer will have to be designed for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility easements will need to be dedicated on the final plat over the public storm drainage system including storm water ponds, drainage swales, emergency overflows, access routes for maintenance, over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, and buffer areas used as PVC. The minimum easement width shall be 20 feet wide. DD. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. EE. Show minimum 30-foot utility easement between Lots 4 and 5, Block 2 along the private driveway from sanitary MH #6 to MH A. FF. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watcrmain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. SP-6 GG. On the site plan: 1. Revise the cul-de-sac pavement radius to 48 feet. 2. Revise the parking driveway aisle from 24 feet to 26 feet wide. 3. Revise the public street width from 32 feet to 36 feet wide. 4. Increase the full access width off Galpin Boulevard to 44 feet and create three lane access. 5. Shift Lots 1 and 8 easterly access further toward the west and realign them across from each other. 6. Show at least one, 6-foot wide, side walk along the public street and pedestrian curb ramps. 7. Show the access off Galpin Boulevard turning curb radius. S. Realign Lot 5, Block 2 access perpendicular to the shared driveway. 9. Show handicap parking spots and ramps. 10. Show concrete driveway apron at every lot access per detail #5207. HH. On the grading plan: 1. Extend silt.fence between the storm pond and Outlot A. Silt fence Type II must be used adjacent to wetlands and storm pond. 2. Revise contour lines to match 3:1 maximum slope and tie the proposed contour lines With the existing contours for Lots 4, 5, Block. 2, south of Lot 2, Block 1, and northeast of Lot 1, Block 2. 3. Show the proposed contour lines forLot 3, Block 1. 4. Show all retaining walls top and bottom elevations. 5. Show all emergency overflows (EOF). The EOF must be 1.5' lower than the adjacent lowest floor. 6. Revise Lot 3, Block 1 parking slope to 0.7% minimum. 7. Add a note to remove any existing structure and access off Galpin Boulevard and . Lyman Boulevard. All disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must. be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. 8. Show 75-foot minimum construction rock entrance. 9. No retaining walls structure is allowed within public street and/or public utility easements, revise accordingly. 10. Show contour lines for the berm on Outlot B. H. On the utility plans: 1. Show 20-foot proposed drainage and utility easements between Lots 2 and 3, Block 2. 2. Show the proposed sanitary and storm sewer stubs inverts. 3. Add storm sewer schedule. 4. Public storm sewer pipe type must be RCP and 15-inch minimum diameter. 5. The last street accessible storm manhole (STMH#2) must be built with a sump. 6. On the utility profile show all sewer and pipe crossings. 7. Minimum vertical separation must be 18 inches between watermain and sewer. 8. Call out watermain fittings SP-7 9. Add the outlet control structure per detail #3109. JJ. Any retaining wall over four feet in height must be designed by a registered Civil Engineer in the state of Minnesota with an approved safety fence on top of it. Also, it will require a building permit from the Building Department. KK. Add the following City of Chanhassen latest Detail Plate Nos. 1001, 1002, 1003, 2109, 2110, 2201, 2204, 2205, 3104, 5201, 5205, 5214, 5215, 5216, 5217, 5221, 5232, 5240, 5241, 5242, 5302 and 5313. LL. Prior to final plat approval, a professional civil engineer registered in the state of Minnesota must sign all plans. MM. Storm pond is required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. Submit drainage calculations for staff review. NN. Cross ,access easements for the shared driveway accesses must.be obtained and recorded against the lots for each of the entrance drives. 00. Any off -site grading will require easements from the appropriate property owner. PP. Public utility improvements will be required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required at the time of final platting. The applicant will also be required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. The applicant must be aware that all public utility improvements will require a preconstruction meeting before building permit issuance. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. QQ. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes and traffic control plans. The applicant should be aware that any off -site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. RR. All private streets are required to have 26-foot wide paved streets from back -of -curb to back -of -curb, be built to a 9-ton design and contained within a 40-foot wide private easement. At the completion of the project, the developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports 'certifying that the private streets were built to a 9-ton design. SP--8 SS. All of the proposed building pads must have a rear yard elevation at least three feet above the HWL of the adjacent ponds. TT. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's Building Department. UU. Comply with Carver County memo dated June 28, 2005 and revise the plans accordingly. W. Revise plan sheet size to 24 x 36 using scale 50. WW. The developer shall dedicate a permanent conservation easement over Outlot C. XX. The applicant shall work with staff to resolve any drainage issues along Lots 5, 6 and Outlot C. YY. The developer shall construct a berm within the 16 foot setback outside the wetland buffer zone on Lot S. ZZ. Revise the construction plans to correspond with the final plat lot designations. AAA. Approval of the final plat is contingent upon approval of final construction plans/specifications for the project along with the developer entering into a development contract with the City and supplying the necessary financial security and fees. BBB. The developer shall pay the $121,960.80 Arterial Collector Fee. CCC. The developer shall work with the City of Chaska to accommodate storm water from properties to the west of the project site." 9. General Conditions. The general conditions of this Contract are attached as Exhibit 'B" and incorporated herein. SP-9 CITY OF CHANHASSEN BY: Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor (SEAL) AND: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager EDEN TRACE CORPORATION: BY: Its STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (Ss. COUNTY OF CARVER - ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20 , by Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor, and by Todd Gerhardt, City Manager, of the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF M NMOTA ) (ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2Q_, by DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 NOTARY PUBLIC SP-10 I EXHIBIT "A" TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT LEGAL DESCRWIJON OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: That part of the East Half (E112) of the Souteast Quarter (SW114), Section 16, Township 116, Range 23 West, which lies South of the North 915.41 feet, westerly of the centerline of County State Aid Highway No. 19, and North of the South 100.00 feet, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the County Recorder, Carver County, Minnesota. /:1 RYi� That part of the Southwest quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 15, Township 1.16 North, Range 23 West, lying westerly of the centerline of the County State Aid No. 19 and northerly of the centerline of County State Aid Highway No. 18. Said property being subject to easements for roadway purposes for County State Aid Highway '19 and County State Aid Highway 18, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the County Recorder, Carver County, Minnesota. Excepting from the first parcel described above the following: All that part of the South 150.00 feet of the north 1065.41 feet of the East Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 16, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota lying westerly of the centerline of County State Aid Highway 19, according to the plat thereof on file or f record in the office of the County Recorder, Carver County, Minnesota. SP-11 FEE OWNER CONSENT TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT fee owners of all or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract, affirm and consent to the provisions thereof and agree to be bound by the provisions as the same may apply to that portion of the subject property owned by them. Dated this day of , 20 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20._, by DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 NOTARY PUBLIC SP-12 MORTGAGE HOLDER CONSENT TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT which holds a mortgage on the subject property, the development of which is governed. by the foregoing Development Contract, agrees that the"Development Contract shall remain in full force and effect even if it forecloses on its mortgage. Dated this day of , 20 STATE OF M94NESOTA ) (ss. COUNTY OF } The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20 , by DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 NOTARY PUBLIC SP=13 IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT No. Date: TO: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard, Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Dear Sir or Madam: We hereby issue, for the account of (Name of Developer) and in your favor, -our Irrevocable Letter of Credit in the amount of $ , available to you by your draft drawn on sight on the undersigned bank. The draft must: a) Bear the clause, "Drawn under Letter of Credit No. , dated , 2 , of(Nam of Bank "; b) Be signed by the Mayor or City Manager of the City of Chanhassen.- c) Be presented for payment at (Address of Bank) on or before 4:00 p.m on November 30, 2 This Letter of Credit shall automatically renew for successive one-year terms unless, at least forty- five (45) days prior to the next annual renewal date (which shall be November 30 of each year), the Bank delivers written notice to the Chanhassen City Manager that it intends to modify the terms of, or cancel, this Letter of Credit. Written notice is effective if sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, and deposited in the U.S. Mail, at least forty-five (45) days prior to the next annual renewal date addressed as follows: Chanhassen City Manager, Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, Chanhassen, MN 55317, and is actually received by the City Manager at least thirty (30) days prior to the renewal date. This Letter of Credit sets forth in full our understanding which -shall not in any way be modified, amended, amplified, or limited by reference to any document, instrument, or agreement, whether or not referred to herein. This Letter of Credit is not assignable. This is not a Notation Letter of Credit. More than one draw may be made under this Letter of Credit. This Letter of Credit shall be governed by the most recent revision of the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits, International Chamber of Commerce Publication No. 500. We hereby agree that a draft drawn under and in compliance with this Letter of Credit shall be duly honored upon presentation. IM Its SP-14 CITY OF CHANHASSEN DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT (Developer Installed Improvements) EXHIBIT "B" 1. Right to Proceed. Within the plat or land to be platted, the Developer may not grade or otherwise disturb the earth, remove trees, construct sewer lines, water lines, streets, utilities, public or private improvements, or any buildings until all the following conditions have been satisfied: 1) this agreement has been fully executed by both parties and filed with the City Clerk, 2) the necessary security and fees have been received by the City, 3) the plat has been, recorded with the County Recorder's Office or Registrar of Title's Office of the County where the plat is located, and 4) the City Engineer has issued a letter that the foregoing conditions have been satisfied and then the Developer may proceed. _ 2. Phased Development. If the plat is a phase of a multiphased preliminary plat, the City may refuse to approve final plats of subsequent phases if the Developer has breached this Contract and the breach has not been remedied. Development of subsequent phases may not proceed until Development Contracts for such phases are approved by the City. Park charges and area charges for sewer and water.refesred to in this Contract are not being imposed on outlots, if any, in the plat that are designated in an approved preliminary plat for future subdivision into lots and blocks. Such charges will be calculated and imposed when the outlots are final platted into lots and blocks. 3. Preliminary Plat Status. If the plat is a phase of a multi -phased preliminary plat, the preliminary plat approval for all phases not final platted shall lapse and be void unless final platted into lots and blocks; not outlots, within two (2) years after preliminary plat approval. 4. Changes in Official Controls. For two (2) years from the date of this Contract, no amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan, except an amendment placing the plat in the current urban service area, or official controls shall apply to or affect the use, development density, lot. size, lot layout or dedications of the approved plat unless required by state or federal law or agreed to in writing by the City and the Developer. Thereafter, notwithstanding anything in this Contract to the contrary, to the full extent permitted by state law the City may require compliance with any amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan, official controls, platting or dedication requirements enacted after the date of this Contract. S. Improvements. The improvements specified in the Special Provisions of this Contract shall be installed in accordance with City standards, ordinances, and plans and specifications which have been prepared and signed by a competent registered professional engineer furnished to the City and approved by the City Engineer. The Developer shall obtain all GC-1 necessary permits from the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services and other pertinent agencies before proceeding with construction. The City will, at the Developer's expense, have one or more construction inspectors and a soil engineer inspect the work on a full or part-time basis. The Developer shall also provide a qualified inspector to perform site inspections on a daily basis. Inspector qualifications shall be submitted in writing to the City Engineer. The Developer -shall instruct its project engineer/inspector to respond to questions from the City Inspector(s) and to make periodic site visits to satisfy that the construction is being performed to an acceptable level of quality in accordance with the engineer's design. The Developer or his engineer shall schedule a preconstruction meeting at a mutually agreeable time at the City Council chambers with all parties concerned, including the City staff, to review the program for the construction work. 6. Iron Monuments, Before the security for the completion of utilities is released, all monuments must be correctly placed in the ground in accordance with Minn. Stat. § 505.02, Subd. 1. The Developer's surveyor shall submit a written notice to the City certifying that the monuments have been installed. 7. License. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the plat to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the City in conjunction with plat development. 8. Site Erosion Control. Before the site is rough graded, and before any utility construction is commenced or building permits are issued, the erosion control plan, Plan B, shall be implemented, inspected, and approved by the City. The City may impose additional erosion control requirements if they would be beneficial. All areas disturbed by the excavation and backfilling operations shall be reseeded forthwith after the completion of the work in that area. Except as otherwise provided in the erosion control plan, seed shall be certified seed to provide a temporary ground cover as rapidly as possible. All seeded areas shall be fertilized, mulched, and disc anchored as necessary for seed retention. The parties recognize that time is of the essence in controlling erosion. If the Developer does not comply with the erosion control plan and schedule of supplementary instructions received from the City, the City may take such action as it deems appropriate to control erosion at the Developer's expense. The City will endeavor to notify the Developer in advance of any proposed action, but failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developer's and City's rights or obligations hereunder. No development will be allowed and no building permits will be issued unless the plat is in full compliance with the erosion control requirements. Erosion control needs to be maintained until vegetative cover has been restored, even if construction has been completed and accepted. After the site has been stabilized to where, in the opinion of the City, there is no longer a need for erosion control, the City will authorize the removal of the erosion control, i.e. hay bales and silt fence. The Developer shall remove and dispose of the erosion control measures. 8a. Erosion Control During Construction of a Dwelling or Other Building. Before a building permit is issued for construction of a dwelling or other building on a lot, a $500.00 cash escrow or letter of credit per lot shall also be furnished to the City to guarantee compliance with City Code § 20-94. GC-2 9. Clean up. The Developer shall maintain a neat and orderly work site and shall daily clean, on and off site, dirt and debris, including blowables, from streets and the surrounding area that has resulted from construction work by the Developer, its agents or assigns. 10. • Acceptance and Ownership of Improvements. Upon completion and acceptance by the City of the work and construction required by this Contract, the improvements lying within public easements shall become City property. After completion of the improvements, a representative of the contractor, and a representative of the Developer's engineer will make a final inspection of the work with the City Engineer. Before the City accepts the improvements, the City Engineer shall be satisfied that all work is satisfactorily completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and the Developer and his engineer shall submit a written statement to the City Engineer certifying that the project has been completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. The appropriate contractor waivers shall also be provided. Final acceptance of the public improvements shall be by City Council resolution. 11. Claims. In the event that the City receives claims from laborers, materialmen, or others that work required by this Contract has been performed, the sums due them have not been paid, and the laborers, materialmen, or others are seeking payment out of the financial guarantees posted with the City, and if the claims are not resolved at least ninety (90) days before the security required by this Contract will expire, the Developer hereby authorizes the City to commence an Interpleader action pursuant to Rule 22, Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure for the District Courts, to draw upon the letters of credit in an amount up to 125% of the claim(s) and deposit the funds in compliance with the Rule, and upon such deposit, the Developer shall release, discharge, and dismiss the City from any further proceedings as it pertains to the letters of credit deposited with the District Court, except that the Court shall retain jurisdiction to determine attorneys' fees. 12. Park Dedication. The Developer shall pay full park dedication fees in conjunction with the installation of the plat. improvements. The park dedication fees shall be the current amount in force at the time of final platting pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinances and City Council resolutions. 13. Landscaping. Landscaping shall be installed in accordance with Plan D. Trees which can cause a public nuisance, such as cotton producing trees, or can be a public hazard, such as bug infestation or weak bark, are prohibited. The minimum tree size shall be two and one-half (21/2) inches caliper, either bare root in season, or balled and burlapped. The trees may not be planted in the boulevard (area between curb and property line). In addition to any sod required as a part of the erosion control plan, Plan B, the Developer or lot purchaser shall sod the boulevard area and all drainage ways on each lot utilizing a minimum of four (4) inches of topsoil as a base. Seed or sod shall also be placed on all disturbed areas of the lot. If these improvements are not in place at the time a certificate of occupancy is requested, a financial guarantee of $750.00 in the form of cash or letter of credit shall be provided to the City. These conditions must then be complied with within two (2) months after the certificate of occupancy issued, except that if the certificate of occupancy is issued between October 1 through May 1 these conditions must be complied with by GC-3 the following July 1st. Upon expiration of the time period, inspections will be conducted by City staff to verify satisfactory completion of all conditions. City staff will conduct inspections of incomplete items with a $50.00 inspection fee deducted from the escrow fund for each inspection. After satisfactory inspection, the financial guarantee shall be returned. If the requirements are not satisfied, the City may use the security to satisfy the requirements. The City may also use the escrowed funds for maintenance of erosion control pursuant to City Code Section 20-94 or to satisfy any other requirements of this Contract or of City ordinances. These requirements supplement, but do not replace, specific landscaping conditions that may have been required by the City Council for project approval. 14. Warranty. The Developer wan -ants all improvements required to be constructed by it pursuant to this Contract against poor material and faulty workmanship. The Developer shall submit either 1) a warranty/maintenance bond for 100% of the cost of the improvement, or 2) a letter of credit for twenty-five percent (2501b) of the amount of the original cost of the improvements. A. The required warranty period for materials and workmanship for the utility contractor installing public sewer and water mains shall be two (2) years from the date of final _ written City acceptance of the work. B. The required warranty period for all work relating to street construction, including concrete curb and gutter, sidewalks and trails, materials and equipment shall be subject to two (2) years from the date of final written acceptance. C. The required warranty period for sod, trees, and landscaping is eighteen (18) months following acceptance by the City. 15. Lot Plans. Prior to the issuance of building permits, an acceptable Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control including silt fences, and Tree Removal Plan shall be submitted for each lot for review and approval by the City Engineer. Each plan shall assure that drainage is maintained away from buildings and that tree removal is consistent with development plans and City Ordinance. 16. Existing Assessments. Any existing assessments against the plat will be re -spread against the plat in accordance with City standards. 17. Hook-up Charges. The Developer also acknowledges overall sanitary sewer and water trunk availability to the site and the hook-up charges established by the City as reasonable compensation for oversizing costs previously incurred, as well as, long-term maintenance. Said hook-up charges are collectible at time of building permit unless a written request is made to assess the costs over a"four year term at the rates in effect at time of application. 1S. Public Street Lighting. The Developer shall have installed and pay for public street lights in accordance with City standards. The public street lights shall be accepted for City GC-4 ownership and maintenance at the same time that the public street is accepted for ownership and maintenance. A plan shall be submitted for the City Engineer's approval prior to the installation. Before the City signs the final plat, the Developer shall pay the City a fee of $300.00 for each street light installed in the plat. The fee shalt be used by the City for furnishing electricity and maintaining each public street light for twenty (20) months. Any upgrade to City standard lights, monthly operation and maintenance fee charges shall be paid by the developer. 19. Signage. All street signs, traffic signs, and wetland monumentation required by the City as a part of the plat shall be furnished and installed by the City at the sole expense of the Developer. 20. House ..Pads. The Developer shall promptly furnish the City "as -built" plans - , indicating the amount, type and limits of fill on any house pad location. 21. Responsibility for Costs. 'A. The Developer shall pay an administrative fee in conjunction with the installation of the plat improvements. This fee is to cover the cost of City Staff time and overhead for items such as review of construction documents, preparation of the Development Contract, monitoring construction progress, processing pay requests, processing security reductions, and final acceptance of improvements. This fee does not cover the City's cost for construction inspections. The fee shall be calculated as follows: i} if the cost of the construction of public improvements is less than $500,000, three percent (3°!o) of construction costs; ii) if the cost of the construction of public improvements is between $500,000 and $1,000,000, three percent (39o') of construction costs for the first $500,000 and two percent (29o) of construction costs over $500,000; if the cost of the construction of public improvements is over $1,000,000, two and one-half percent (2%i%) of construction costs for the first $1,000,000 and one and one-half percent (11/s%) of construction costs over $1,000,000. Before the City signs the final plat, the Developer shall deposit with the City a fee based upon construction estimates. After construction is completed, the final fee shall be determined based upon actual construction costs. The cost of public improvements is defined in paragraph 6 of the Special Provisions. B. In addition to the administrative fee, the Developer shall reimburse the City for all costs incurred by the City for providing construction inspections. This cost will be periodically GC-5 billed directly to the Developer based on the actual progress of the construction. Payment shall be due in accordance with Article 20E of this Agreement. C. The Developer shall hold the City and its officers and employees harmless from claims made by itself and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from plat approval and development. The Developer shall indemnify the City and its officers and employees for all costs, damages, or expenses which the City may pay or incur in consequence of such claims, including attorneys' fees. D. In addition to the administrative fee, the Developer shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the enforcement of this Contract, including engineering and attorneys` fees. E. The Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City for obligations incurred under this Contract within thirty (30) days after receipt. If the bills are not paid on time, the City may halt all plat development work and construction, including but not limited to the issuance of building permits for lots which the Developer may or may not have sold, until the bills are paid in full. Bills not paid within thirty (30) days shall accrue interest at the rate of 8% per year. F. In addition to the charges and special assessments referred to herein, other charges and special assessments may be imposed such as, but not limited to, sewer availability charges ("SAC"), City water connection charges, City sewer connection charges, and building permit fees. G. Private Utilities. The Developer shall have installed and pay for the installation of electrical, natural gas, telephone, and cable television service in conjunction with the overall development improvements. These services shall be provided in accordance with each of the respective franchise agreements held with the City. H. The developer shall pay the City a fee established by City Council resolution, to reimburse the City for the cost of updating the City's base maps, GIS data base files, and converting the plat and record drawings into an electronic format. 22. Developer's Default. In the event of default by the Developer as to any of the work to be performed by it hereunder, the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City, provided the Developer is first given notice of the work in default, not less than four (d) days in advance. This Contract is a license for the City to act, and it shall not be necessary -for the City to seek a Court order for permission to enter the land. When the City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, assess the cost in whole or in part. 23. Miscellaneous. A. Construction Trailers. Placement of on -site construction trailers and temporary job site offices shall be approved by the City Engineer as a part of the pre -construction meeting for GC-6 installation of public improvements. Trailers shall be removed from the subject property within thirty (30) days following the acceptance of the public improvements unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. B. Postal Service. The Developer shall provide for the maintenance of postal service in accordance with the local Postmaster's request. C. Third Parties. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this Contract. The City is not a guarantor of the Developer's obligations under this Contract. The City shall have no responsibility or liability to lot purchasers or others for the City's failure to enforce this Contract or for allowing deviations from it. D. Breach of Contract. Breach of the terms of this Contract by the Developer shall be grounds for denial of building permits, including lots sold to third parties. The City may also issue a stop work order halting all plat development until the breach has been cured and the City has received satisfactory assurance that the breach will not reoccur. E. Se_v_errability.' if any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph, or phrase of this Contract is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not. affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Contract. F. Building Permits. Building permits will not be issued in the plat until sanitary sewer, watermain, and storm sewer have been installed, tested, and accepted by the City, and the streets needed for access have been paved with a bituminous surface and the site graded and revegetated in accordance with Plan B of the development plans. G. Waivers/Amendments. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the provisions of this Contract. To be binding, amendments or waivers shall be in writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City's failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Contract shall not be a waiver or release. H. Release. This Contract shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the property. After the Developer has completed the work required of it under this Contract, at the Developer's request the City Manager will issue a Certificate of Compliance. Prior to the issuance of such a certificate, individual lot owners may make as written request for a certificate applicable to an individual lot allowing a minimum of ten (10) days for processing. 1. Insurance. Developer shall take out and maintain until six (6) months after the City has accepted the public improvements, public liability and property damage insurance covering personal injury, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise out of Developer's work or the work of its subcontractors or by one directly or indirectly employed by any of them. Limits for bodily injury and death shall be not less than $500,000 for one person and $1,000,000 for each occurrence; limits for property damage shall be not less than $500,000 for each GC-7 occurrence; or a combination single limit policy of $1,000,000 or more. The City shall be named as an additional insured on the policy, and the Developer shall file with the City a certificate evidencing coverage prior to the City signing the plat. The certificate shall provide that the City must be given ten (10) days advance written notice of the cancellation of the insurance. The certificate may not contain any disclaimer for failure to give the required notice. J. Remedies. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative and in addition to every other right, power or remedy, expressed or implied, now or hereafter arising, available to City, at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised from time to time as often and in such order as may be deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the right to exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or remedy. K. Assignability. The Developer may not assign this Contract without the written permission of the City Council. The Developer's obligation hereunder shall continue in full force and effect even if the Developer sells one or more lots, the entire plat, or any part of it. L. Construction_Hgrs. Construction hours for required improvements under this contract shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays with no such activity allowed on Sundays or any recognized legal holidays. Under emergency conditions, this limitation may be waived by the consent of the City Engineer. Any approved work performed after dark shall be adequately illuminated. If construction occurs outside of the permitted construction hours, the Developer shall pay the following administrative penalties: First violation Second violation Third & subsequent violations li li tit it nu site development and coostu "On must cease for sewn (n calendar days M. Noise Amplification. The use of outdoor loudspeakers, bullhorns, intercoms, and similar devices is prohibited in conjunction with the construction of homes, buildings, and the improvements required under this contract. The administrative penalty for violation of construction hours shall also apply to violation of the provisions in this paragraph. N. Access. All access to the plat prior to the City accepting the roadway improvements shall be the responsibility of the Developer regardless if the City has issued building permits or occupancy permits for lots within the plat. 4. Street Maintenance. The Developer _ shall be responsible for all street maintenance until streets within the plat are accepted by the City. Warning signs shall be placed by the Developer when hazards develop in streets to prevent the public from traveling on same and directing attention to detours. If streets become impassable, the City may order that such streets shall be barricaded and closed. The Developer shall maintain a smooth roadway surface and provide proper surface drainage. The Developer may request, in writing, that the City plow show GC-8 on the streets prior to final acceptance of the streets. The City shall have complete discretion to approve or reject the request. The City shall not be responsible for reshaping or damage to the street base or utilities because of snow plowing operations. The provision of City snow plowing service does not constitute final acceptance of the streets by the City. P. Storm Sewer Maintenance. The Developer shall be responsible for cleaning and maintenance of the storm sewer system (including ponds, pipes, catch basins, culverts and swales) within the plat and the adjacent off -site storm sewer system that receives storm water from the plat. The Developer shall follow all instructions it receives fiom the City concerning the cleaning and maintenance of the storm sewer system. The Developer's obligations under this paragraph shall end two (2) years after the public street and storm drainage improvements in the plat have been accepted by the City. Twenty percent (2001o) of the storm sewer costs, shown under section 6 of the special provisions of this contract, will be held by the City for the duration of the 2-year maintenance period. Q. Soil_ Treatment_Systems. If soil treatment systems are required, the Developer shall clearly identify in the field and protect from alteration, unless suitable alternative sites are first provided, the two soil treatment sites identified during the platting process for each lot. This shall be done prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. Any violation/disturbance of these sites shall render them as unacceptable and replacement sites will need to be located for each violated site in order to obtain a building permit. R. Variances. By approving the plat; the Developer represents that all lots in the plat are buildable without the need for variances from the City's ordinances. S. Compliance with _Uws,_Ordinances, and Regulations. In the development of the plat the Developer shall comply with all laws, ordinances, and regulations of the following authorities: 1. City of Chanhassen; 2. State of Minnesota, its agencies, departments and commissions; 3. United States Army Corps of Engineers; 4. Watershed District(s); 5. Metropolitan Government, its agencies, departments and commissions. T. Proof of Title. Upon request, the Developer shall furnish the City with evidence satisfactory to the City that it has the authority of the fee owners and contract for deed purchasers to enter into this Development Contract. U. Soil Conditions. The Developer acknowledges that the City makes no representations or warranties as to the condition of the soils on the property or its fitness for construction of the improvements or any other purpose for which the Developer may make use of such property. The Developer further agrees that it will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City, its governing body members, officers, and employees from any claims or actions arising out of GC-9 the presence, if any, of hazardous wastes or pollutants on the property, unless hazardous wastes or pollutants were caused to be there by the City. V. Soil Correction. The Developer shall be responsible for soil correction work on the property. The City makes no representation to the Developer concerning the nature of suitability of soils nor the cost of correcting any unsuitable soil conditions which may exist. On lots which have no fill material a soils report from a qualified soils engineer is not required unless the CiWs building inspection department determines from observation that there may be a soils problem. On lots with fill material that have been mass graded as part of a multi -lot grading project, a satisfactory soils report from a qualified soils engineer shall be provided before the City issues a building permit for the lot. On lots with fill material that have been custom graded, a satisfactory soils report from a qualified soils engineer shall be provided before the City inspects the foundation for a building on the lot. W. Haul Routes. Bluff Creek Drive from Trunk Highway 212 to Pioneer Trail (CSAH 14) may not be used by the Developer, the Developer's contractors or subcontractors as a haul route for the import or export of soil, construction material, construction equipment or construction debris, or any other purpose. X. Development Signs. The Developer shall post a six foot by eight foot development sign in accordance with City Detail Plate No. 5313 at each entrance to the project. The sign shall be in place before construction of the required improvements commences and shall be removed when the required improvements are completed, except for the final lift of asphalt on streets. The signs shall contain the following information: project name, name of developer, developer's telephone number and designated contact person, allowed construction hours. Y. Construction Plans. Upon final plat approval, the developer shall provide the City with two complete sets of full-size construction plans and four sets of 11"xl7" reduced construction plan sets and three sets of specifications. Within sixty (60) days after the completion of the utility improvements and base course pavement and before the security is released, the Developer shall- supply the City with the following: (1) a complete set of reproducible Mylar as -built plans, (2) two complete full-size sets of blue line/paper as -built plans, (3) two complete sets of utility tie sheets, (4) location of buried fabric used for soil stabilization, (5) location stationing and swing ties of all utility stubs including draintile cleanouts, (6) bench mark network, (7) digital file of as -built plans in both .dxf & .tif format (the .dxf file must be tied to the current county coordinate system), and (8) digital file of utility tie sheets in either .doe or .tif format. The Developer is required to submit the final plat in electronic format. Z. As -Built Lot Surveys. An as -built lot survey will be required on all lots prior to the Certificate of Occupancy being issued. The as -built lot survey must be prepared, signed, and dated by a Registered Land Surveyor. Rev. 3/3110.1 GC-10 I NEWDOC S � a 1 k w CITY OF CWHAMMEN 7700I, M Barlev d PO BU 147 aarhoA MN 55317 Administration t' M %W7.1100 fax 962227.1110 Building Inspections Ptm952227.11W fax 952227.1190 Eegineering HM952227,1160 i'vG%WI,1170 Fnance 1'bo %2.227.1140 fac 952.227.1110 Park & Recreation fteW227.1120 Fk952M.1110 Recreatiar 0mv 2310 Cou',er 8wo yud RM 952227.1400 fax 962.227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources R= 952227.1i30 fax: 952227.1110. Public Works 1591 Park Road I?t: 952227.1300 fax 952227.1310 Senior Center t't>one: %W7.1125 fax 952227.1110 Web Site September 6, 2005 Mr. Mark Undestad Eden Trace Corporation . 8156 Mallory Court Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case #05-23 Dear Mark: This letter is to confirm that on August 22, 2005 the Chanhassen City Council approved the following: The ordinance Rezoning the property located within the Chanhassen West Business Park from Agricultural Estate District (A2) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) incorporating the development design standards contained within the staff report, modified to delete items G(7) and -H(5); The Preliminary Plat for Chanhassen West I Schoell & Madson,:.Inc., dated June 17, 2005, 1. Applicant shall increase:landscapeplanti line bufferyards t6meet-minimutn requi> shall be sub' iitted•before final'annrovaU 3. All trees shown,asrpreserved on plan trees damaged or removed shM11 be re A _ 4. Wetland replacement s-fia . I t. occur in a Wetland.ConservateotiAct fMl2 R42C s dated-`61!7/6S shall 'be.protectec submitted for the proposed, project The application shall tn6l6d& sequencing discasslons and sequencing flexlblhty requests, r, applacable 'he applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan pnot to or concurrent with final plat approval.yand prior to wetlalacl >�mpacts occurring, 5. A wetland buffer,I6 5 to 20 feet an width (with a "minimum average of feet) shall be maintainedaround all wetlands and. proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas shall bepreserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland -ordinance The.applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. 1WHW The City of £ba nhasse n • A growing oor;=4 with Clete lakes, (plifp 91mis. a chaardng downtown. Wffing bus esses, winding trails, and Wrt M parks, A gWI place to live. wok and play, Mr. Mark Undestad Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 September 6, 2005 Page 2 of 8 6. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. 7. The proposed development shall maintain existing runoff rates and meet NURP standards. Storm water calculations shall be submitted to ensure the proposed storm water pond is sized adequately for the proposed development. 8. Stable emergency overflows shall be provided for the proposed pond on site. The emergency overflows shall be clearly labeled on the plan and a detail is needed. The emergency overflows may be stabilized with a turf re -enforcement mat or fabric and riprap. 9. Notes on the plan describing tinting of temporary stabilization with Type ! mulch and seed or erosion control blanket and seed shall be included. The notes shall include timing of stabilization as well as the rate of mulch application (2 tons per acre, disc anchored). 10. All riprap/fabric at the flared end section shall be installed within 24 hours of flared end section installation. 11. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Tyne of Slope Time (Maximum time an area can Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area 10:1 to 3:1 14 days is not actively being worked.) Flatter than 10:1 21 days These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent di ainage ditch or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water. 12. Erosion control blanket shall be specified in the swale from the flared end section to the wetland along the west boundary of the site. The blanket specified shall adequately protect the area from designed velocity and depth of flow. The blanket and seed in the swale shall be installed within 5 days of culvert installation. Erosion control blanket is recommended for the pond slopes from around 952 to 942 contours. All blanket on the plan shall be shown as a shaded area. 13. Temporary sediment basins shall be installed prior to disturbing upslope areas. The areas of =a;sn 0 temporary sediment basins shall be labeled on the plan. A temporary outlet (e.g., a Mr. Mark Undestad Chanhassen West, Business Park Planning Case 05-23 September 6, 2005 Page 3 of 8 perforated riser and rock cone) shall be provided for the pond; details should be provided. Temporary basins shall be constructed in the area of the proposed permanent storm water pond, the southeast corner of the site prior to discharging to the culvert under Galpin Boulevard, and possibly in the northwest area of the site to handle water runon from the north prior to discharge to the wetland. 14. Any and all area inlets or drop inlets in paved areas shall be protected with alternate controlslWimco details. The engineer shall research and provide alternate designs for Wimco-type inlet controls to fit the various types of inlets. 15. Additional'inilet controls shall be provided for adjacent inlets on Galpin Boulevard and Street A 16. Silt fence shall be installed around 4utlot A along the east side between the pond the wetland. 17. Type 1 and Type 2 silt fence locations shall be specified on the plan. Type 2 silt fence shall be installed around all wetland areas and in the southeast corner of the site to protect the culvert under Galpin Boulevard. The silt fence shall be extended along the south side to close the gap in the silt fence. 18. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. 19. The estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $413,661. 20. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase 11 construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval. 21. In lieu of parkland dedication and trail construction, full park fees shall be collected at the rate in force at the time of final plat for the proposed Chanhassen West Business Park. At current rates, the park fee would total $359,500 (35.95 x $10,000 per acre). 22. A demolition permit must be obtained before beginning demolition of any existing structures. 23. Retaining walls over four high must be designed by a professional engineer and a permit must be obtained prior to construction. 24. Provide a water service for Lot 6. 25. A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that Mr. Mark Undestad Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 September 6, 2005 Page 4 of 8 fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. 26. Fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for fire protection is required to be installed. Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction except when approved alternate methods of protection are provided. 27. The new proposed street will be required to have a street name. Submit proposed street name to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval. 28. No burning permits will be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. 29. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed load of fire apparatus and shall be surfaced so as to provide all weather driving capabilities. Pursuant to Minnesota Fire code Section 503.2.3. 30. Temporary street signs shall be installed on street intersections when construction of a new roadway allows passage be vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota fire code Section 501.4. 31. Prior to final platting, storm sewer design data will need to be submitted for staff review. Depending on the size of the drainage area, additional catch basins may be required at that time. The storm sewer will have to be designed for a 10-year, 24-hoar storm event. Drainage and utility easements will need to be dedicated on the final plat over the public storm drainage system including storm water ponds, drainage swales, emergency overflows, access routes for maintenance, over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, and buffer areas used as PVC. The minimum easement width shall be 20 feet wide. 32. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. 33. Private utility easements are required for the sanitary sewer and water lines that serve Lot 4 but go through Lot 5. 34. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. 35.On the site plan: a. Revise the cul-de-sac pavement radius to 48 feet. b. Revise the parking driveway aisle from 24 feet to 26 feet wide. c. Revise the public street width from 32 feet to 36 feet wide. d. Increase the full access width off GaIpin Boulevard to 44 feet and create three lane access. Mr. Mark Undestad Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 September 6, 2005 Page 5 of 8 e. Shift Lots 1 and 8 easterly access further toward the west and realign the across each other. f. Show at least one, 6-foot wide, side walk along the public street. g. Show the access off Galpin Boulevard turning curb radius. h. Realign lot 5 access perpendicular to the shared driveway. i. Show street lights. j. Show handicap parks and ramps. 36.On the grading plan: a. Extend silt fence type between the storm pond and Outlot A. Silt fence Type II must be used adjacent to wetlands and storm pond. b. Revise contour lines to match 3:1 maximum slope and tie the proposed contour lines with the existing contours for.Lots 4, 5, south of Lot 2 and northeast of Lot 1. c. Show the proposed contour lines for Lot 6. d. Show all retaining walls top and bottom elevations. e. Show all emergency overflows (EOF). The EOF must be 1.5' lower than the adjacent lowest floor. f Revise Lot 6 parking slope to 0.7% minimum. g. Add a note to remove any existing structure and access off Galpin Boulevard and all disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. h. Show 75-foot minimum construction rock entrance. i. No retaining walls structure is allowed within public street and/or public utility easements, revise accordingly. j. Show 20-foot utility easement for the storm sewer between Lots 2 and 3 k. Show contour lines for the berm on Outlot. B. 37.On the utility plans: a. Show all existing and proposed drainage and utility easements. b. Show the proposed sanitary and storm sewer stubs inverts. c. Add storm sewer schedule. d. Public storm sewer pipe type must be RCP and 15-inch minimum diameter. e. The last street accessible storm manhole (STMH#2) must be built with a sump. f. Revise sanitary sewer pipe from DIP to PVC-C900. g. On the utility profile show all sewer and pipe crossings. h. Minimum vertical separation must be 18 inches between watermain and sewer. i. Call out watermain fittings 38. Any retaining wall over four feet in height must be designed by a registered Civil Engineer in the state of Minnesota with an approved safety fence on top of it. Also, it will require a building permit from the Building Department. 39. Add the following City of Chanhassen Detail Plate Nos. 1002, 2109, 2110 2204, 3104, 3109, 5201, 5205, 5214 and 5215. Mr. Mark Undestad Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 September 6, 2005 Page 6 of 8 46. Prior to final plat approval, a professional civil engineer registered in the state of Minnesota must sign all plans. 41. All of the ponds are required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. 42. Cross -access easements for the shared driveway accesses must be obtained and recorded against the lots for each of the entrance drives. 43. Any off -site grading will require easements from the appropriate property owner. 44. Public utility improvements will be required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required at the time of final platting. The applicant will also be required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. The applicant must be aware that all public utility improvements will require a preconstruction meeting before building permit issuance. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. 45. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes and traffic control plans. The applicant should be aware that any off -site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. 46. All private streets are required to have 24-foot wide paved streets from back -of -curb to back - of -curb, be built to a 7-ton design and contained within a 40-foot wide private easement. At the completion of the project, the developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 7-ton design. 47. Six-foot wide sidewalks are required. 48. All of the proposed building pads must have a rear yard elevation at least three feet above the HWL of the adjacent ponds. 49. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's Building Department. 50. Comply with Carver County memo dated June 28, 2005 and revise the plans accordingly. 51. Revise plan sheet size to 24 x 36 using scale 50. 52. The developer shall dedicate a permanent conservation easement over Outlot C. Mr. Mark Undestad Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 September 6, 2005 Page 7 of 8 53. The applicant shall work with staff to resolve any drainage issues along Lots 5, 6 and Outlot C. 54. The developer shall construct a berm within the 16 foot setback outside the wetland buffer zone on Lot 5. And; The Wetland Alteration Permit to fill and alter wetlands within the development, plans prepared by Schoell & Madsen, Inc., dated June 17, 2005, subject to the following conditions: 1. A no loss determination shall be completed for Basin F 31-34. 2. Exemption requests shall be completed for Basins F 51-80 N. Basin F 91-97 and Wetland A. 3. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent. with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). A Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for Water/Wetland Projects (Parts I and 11) shall be submitted for the proposed project. The application shall include sequencing discussions and sequencing flexibility requests, if applicable. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat: approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. 4. A five-year wetland replacement monitoring plan shall be submitted. The replacement monitoring plan shall include a.detailed management plan for invasive non-native species, particularly purple loosestrife and reed canary grass. The plans shall show fixed photo monitoring points for the replacement wetland. The applicant shall provide proof of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland. 5. Several corrections must be made to the Wetland Mitigation Plan (sheet 10 of 13): a. Wetland A is shown as an impact area. Upon finalization of exemption paperwork, mitigation will not be required for this wetland; b. Wetland C (Basin F 87-90) is 0.05 acres in area; and c. Wetland D (Basin F 81-86) is 0.09 acres in area. 6. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. 7. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and. seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five years from the date of Mr. Mark Undestad Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 September 6, 2005 Page 8 of 8 final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. 8. Drainage and utility easements a minimum of 20 feet in width shall be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used as PVC and storm water ponds. 9. Silt fence shall be installed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond the wetland. 10. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase H construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval." Final plat documents must be submitted to the City three weeks prior to the City Council meeting in which you wish to have your final plat approved. Enclosed is the list of items required for submittal for final plat approval and a copy of the Development Design Standards for Chanhassen West Business Park. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (952) 227-1131. Since Robert Generous, AICP Senior Planner - Enclosures cc: - Alyson Morris, Assistant City Engineer Steve Torell, Building Official g ipl=VM5 planning cases\OS-23 chanhassen west business parkapproval letter preliminary.doc ITEMS REOUIRED FOR FINAL PLAT CONSIDERATION (6/9/04) The following items are required to be submitted a minimum of three (3) weeks prior to City Council meeting and payment of a $250.00 final plat review fee: 1. Submit three (3) sets of construction plans and specifications for staff review and redline. The construction plans and specifications shall be in accordance to the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications & Detail Plates. The plans shall include traffic signage and street light placement. Utility plans shall show both plan view and profiles of all utilities (sanitary sewer, water and storm sewer lines). Grading and drainage plans shall show dwelling type and elevations, wetlands and wetland buffer areas, storinwater pond NWLS and HWLS, catch basin, and storm manhole numbers. 2. Drainage calculations for water quantity and quality ponding with maps showing drainage areas for pre -and post -development conditions and contributing areas to catch basins. 3. Tree Preservation Easements (if applicable). 4. Trail Easements (if applicable). 5. Landscape Plan and Cost Estimates (Woodland Management Plan, if applicable). 6. Engineer's Cost Estimate of Public Improvements: a. Sanitary sewer system. b. Water system. C. Storm sewer drainage system including cleaning and maintenance. d. Streets, sidewalk and trails. e. Erosion control. f. Site restoration (seeding, sodding, etc.). g. Site grading 7. Ten (10) sets (folded) of final plat, one (1) set of reductions (81/V x 11"), a digital copy in .dwg format (AutoCAD compatible), and a digital copy in .tif format. 8. Digital copy of the legal description of the property in a .doc. or .pdf compatible format. 9. Lot tabulations 10. 1" = 200' scale paper or mylar reduction of the final plat with just street names and Lat and Block numbers. Failure to provide any of the above items by the required deadline will result in delaying consideration of final plat before the City Council. glcaglfmmVnZplat submittaUm Approved 08/22/05 CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS PARK DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS Staff is proposing the following development standards govern the development of the Property Development Standards a. Intent The purpose of this zone is to create a PUD light industrial/office park. The use of the PUD zone is to allow for more flexible design standards while creating a higher quality and more sensitive proposal. All utilities are required to be placed underground. Each lot proposed for development shall proceed through site plan review based on the development standards outlined below. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. Ancillary uses may be permitted as listed below once a primary use has occupied the site. Shared parking may be used within the development. b. Permitted Uses The permitted uses in this zone shall be limited to light industrial, warehousing, and office as defined below. The uses shall be limited to those as defined herein. If there is a question as to whether or not a use meets the definition, the Community Development Director shall make that interpretation. Light Industrial - The manufacturing, compounding, processing, assembling, packaging, or testing of goods or equipment or research activities entirely within an enclosed structure. There shall be negligible impact upon the surrounding environment by noise, vibration, smoke, dust or pollutants. Conferences/Convention Center - establishments designed to accommodate people in assembly, providing conference and meeting services to individuals, groups, and organizations. Can yard - means any area or use of land where vehicles, equipment, and/or construction materials and supplies commonly used by building, excavation, roadway construction, landscaping and similar contractors are stored or serviced. A contractor's yard includes both areas of outdoor storage and areas confined within a completely enclosed buildings used in conjunction with a contractor's business. Must comply with the following standards: (1) Equipmentand supply storage must be screened or enclosed. Screening shall comply with Buffer Yard D and F4 Fencing as specified in Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code..` (2) Vehicles/Equipment shall be stored within an enclosed or screened area. (3) No unlicensed or inoperable vehicle/equipment shall be stored on premises. (4) All chemicals shall be stored in proper storage facilities, specified by OSHA regulations. (5) The contractor shall be Licensed, Bonded and Insured Day Care - establishments providing for the care and supervision of infants and children: on a daily basis. The following applies to Day care centers: (1) The site shall have loading and drop off points designed to avoid interfering with traffic and pedestrian movements. (2) Outdoor play areas shall be located and designed in a manner which mitigates visual and noise impacts on adjoining residential areas. (3) Each center shall obtain all applicable state, county, and city licenses. Health Services- establishments primarily engaged in furnishing medical, surgical and other health services to persons. Office - Professional and business office. RecreationlHealth Club establishments engaged in operating reducing and other health clubs, spas, and similar facilities featuring exercise and other physical fitness '. conditioning. Research. Laboratory establishments engaged in scientific research or study. Must comply with the following standards: (1) All chemicals and pollutants and waste must be stored, used and disposed of according to OSHA and Hazmat regulations and standards. (2) The building must be secure from persons other than laboratory personnel. (3) No outdoor experiments that cause hazards or excessive noise or odors shall be permitted on site. Utility services 2 Warehousing - Means the commercial storage of merchandise and personal property. Ancillary Uses (in conjunction with and integral to a primary use) Antennas Screened outdoor storage - Outside storage is permitted, if approved by the City Council as part of the site plan review, subject to being completely screened with 100 percent opaque fence and/or landscape screening. Showroom - showroom type display area for products stored or manufactured on -site provided that no more than 20 percent of the floor space is used for such display and sales. Telecommunication Towers by conditional use permit only. Prohibited uses • Auto related including sales and repair • Churches • Garden Center • Home furnishings and equipment stores • Home Improvement/Building Supply • Lumber Yard • Retail • Outdoor speakers or public address systems C. Setbacks The development is regulated by the PUD Standards. There are no minimum requirements for setbacks on interior lot lines in the PUD zone, except as specified below. The following setbacks shall apply: In the PUD standards, there is the requirement for landscape buffering in addition to building and parking setbacks. The following building and parking setbacks shall apply: Buffer yard, Setback building/parking (ft.) Galpin Blvd. C, 50,50 Lyman Blvd. C, 50, 50 Street A NA, 30, 10 Interior Lot Lines B, 0, 0 M West Perimeter Lot Line (adjacent to C, 30,20 industrial) North Perimeter Lot Line (adjacent to D,100, 100 residential): Buffer yard & setback No fences shall be permitted between the required landscape buffer and arterial and collector roads. The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 70% for office and industrial uses. Any one site/lot can exceed the 70 percent requirement, but in no case can the entire finished development exceed 70 percent. d. Development Standards Tabulation Box 1. Building Area Building Square Footage Breakdown Use Percent Total Square Feet Office 30% 105,000 Light Industrial /Warehouse 70% 245,000 Total (Maximum) 350,000 The actual use percentages and square footage totals may vary provided that the total building square footages are not exceeded. 2. More than one (1) principal structure may be placed on one (1) platted lot. 3. Building height shall be limited to 3 stories or4 feet, except for Lot 5, Block 2 (lot 5) and Lot 3, Block 1 (lot G) which shall have a building height limit of 2 stories and 30 feet, including parapet. e. _ Building Materials and Design 1. The PUD requires that. the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. 2. All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Masonry or higher quality material shall be used. Color shall be introduced through colored block or panels and not painted cinder block. 3. Brick may be used and must be approved to assure uniformity. 4 4. Blodk shall have a weathered face or be polished, fluted, or broken face. 5. Concrete maybe poured in place, tilt -up or pre -cast, and shall be finished in stone, textured, coated, or painted. d. Metal siding will not be approved except as support material to one of the above materials or curtain wall on office components or, as trim or as HVAC screen. 7. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with the primary structure. . S. All roof mounted equipment shall be screened from adjacent public right-of-ways by walls of compatible appearing material or camouflaged to blend into the building or background. Wood screen fences are prohibited. All exterior process machinery, tanks, etc., are to be fully screened by compatible materials. 9. The use of large unadorned, concrete panels and concrete block, or a solid wall unrelieved by architectural detailing, such as change in materials, change in color, fenestrations, or other significant visual relief provided in a manner or at intervals in keeping with the size, mass, and scale of the wall and its views from public ways shall be prohibited. Acceptable materials will incorporate textured surfaces, exposed aggregate and/or other patterning. All walls shall be given added architectural interest through building design or appropriate landscaping. The buildings shall have varied and interesting detailing. 10. Space for recycling shall be provided in the interior of all principal structures or within an enclosure for each lot developed in the Business Park. 11 Each buildings shall contain one or more pitched roof elements depending on scale and type of building, or other architectural treatments such as towers, arches, vaults, entryway projections, canopies and detailing to add additional interest and articulation to structures. 12. There shall be no underdeveloped sides of buildings visible from public right-of- ways. All elevations visible from the street shall receive nearly equal treatment and visual qualities. f. Site Landscaping and Screening L Landscaping along Lyman and Galpin Boulevards shall comply with buffer yard standard C. Landscaping along the northern project perimeter shall comply with buffer yard D. Landscaping along the westerly project perimeter shall comply with buffer yard B. All buffer yard plantings shall be installed as part of the subdivision. Each lot must present a landscape plan for approval with the site plan review process. 5 2. St6rage of material outdoors is prohibited unless it has been approved under site plan review. All approved outdoor storage must be screened with berms, masonry fences and/or landscaping. 3. When parking lots are less than three feet above the adjacent roadway, an undulating or angular berm or elevation change of three feet or more in height shall be installed. All required boulevard landscaping shall be sodded. 4. _ Loading areas shall be screened 100 percent year round from public right-of-ways. Wing walls may be required where deemed appropriate. g. Signage 1. The Chanhassen West Business Park PUD shall be permitted one project identification sign at the entrance on Galpin Boulevard. The sign shall not exceed eight feet in height. A maximum of 80 square feet of sign area shall be permitted. The project identification sign shall not be counted against the permitted signage on an individual parcel. 2. All freestanding parcel signs shall be limited to monument signs. The sign shall not exceed eighty (80) square feet in sign display area nor be greater than eight (8) feet in height. 3. Each property shall be allowed one monument sign per street frontage. 4. The signage will have consistency throughout the development. A common theme will be introduced at the development's entrance monument and will be used. throughout. The sign treatment is an element of the architecture and thus should reflect the quality of the development. The signs should be consistent in color, size, and material throughout the development. 5. Wall sign shall be permitted per city ordinance for industrial office park site. 6. All signs shall require a separate sign permit. h. Lighting 1. Lighting for the interior of the business center should be consistent throughout the development. 2. A decorative, shoe box fixture (high pressure sodium vapor lamps) with a square ornamental pole shall be used throughout the development area for area lighting. 3. Lighting equipment similar to what is mounted in the public street right-of-ways shall be used in the private areas. 0 4. All light fixturds shall be shielded. Light level for site lighting shall be no more than 1/2 candle at the property line. This does not apply to street lighting. i. Alternative Access I. Each site shall accommodate transit service within the individual development, whenever possible. 2. Pedestrian access shall be provided from each site to the public sidewalk and trail system. 3. The developer and site users shall promote and encourage Traffic Demand Management Strategies. 4. Each site shall provide areas for bicycle parking and storage. S. Preferential parking shall be provided for car and van pool vehicles within each site. 7 m n� MEMEM •3 a Meuwissen, Kim From: Meuwissen, Kim Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 11:18 AM To: 'Mark Undestad'' Cc: Generous, Bob Subject: Chanhassen West Business Park Mark, d Attached for your information is a copy of the approval letter for the rezoning, preliminary plat and wetland alteration permit for Chanhassen West Business Park. Also attached is a copy of the invoice in the amount of $249 for the public hearing notice labels which is past due. It would be greatly appreciated if you could please remit payment at your earliest convenience. Thanks! Kim Meuwissen Planning Secretary 952-227-1107 f 9/8/2005 SCANNED NEWOOC `� ■ems 0 NEWDOC . r October 7, 2005 CITY OF CMNSEN 7ro0WAABrxftd Mr. Thomas 3. Hughes POBU141 Assistant Vice President QzfeMMN55317 Community Bank Corporation Administration 455 Pond Promenade Phone; 952M.1100 P. O. Box 1177 fm%2.227.1110 . Chanhassen, MN 55317 . Building Inspections Pt %M7.1180 And iax9=7.1190 Engineering Carver County Abstract & Title Company PI952.227.1160 411 North Chestnut Street Fax%M7.1170 Chaska, MN 55318 finance . I?tgre%M7.1140 Re: Chanhassen West Business Park (the "proJect"a '- fax952227.1i1D City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota Paris b Recreation Planning Case #05-23 . t' w 952227.1120 fax 952227.1110 f =" Ladies and Gentlemen, Reaeation Center 2310Caterl3oeievard Piror %2.227,1400 .6 "�� '' This office has been,requested to`confi -m certain facts and circurnstarices 2227.144 ecrtzoig, land us; mlancstatus of efx concerning thun Planning & the above referenced project Tn furtherance of:that requew st �ehereby confirm , Natural Resources and advise you as follows, to wit: _ Pt 9522271130 _ fax952227.i1i0 1. The above referenced protect; is located within the corporate limits of the Public Works City of Chanhassen; Carver County,Minnesota `Accordingly, the building 1591I'arkiio8d thp improvements the jurisdiction ae ndf fax 95925222227.71.3131004 and other composing under enorn . d aios;are re uiredto cwihthebudin odes, ordances .. the -City ofChanhassen; Carver County, Mnnesota Senior Center _� K 952227.1125 fax9522273110 x 2 Theproject currentlyis Idcaied in a -district with zoning classification' of _; i Plarined'Unit Development (Officelfndusfrial), pUD,:and a comprehensive Web Site plan designation'' of OfficWdustnal The zoning classification is consistent with the cam reh-ensive plan designation, `° ng ordinance; applicable to the project 3. An further amendments to the zoning y _ _ will be consistent with the aforesaid comprehensive!plan designation at all times. The City of Chanhassen • A gro- ing MrrnwiV with clean ift graliV sclmis, a d2mng 6mbm, tYMng businesses, wir4ing trails, and l"fui parks, Age Place to lam. Work and PWY Mr. Thomas J. Hughes and Carver County Abstract October 7, 2005 Page 2 4. The current use of the project for office -warehouse -manufacturing use is a permitted use under the aforesaid zoning classification and is consistent with the aforesaid comprehensive plan designation. 5. The project's proposed use, as described above, complies with the above stated current zoning classification and all current zoning requirements and regulations applicable thereto, and also complies with the above stated comprehensive plan designation and all requirements applicable thereto. 6. The project was approved by Ordinance No. 399 of the City Council of the City of Chanhassen on August 22, 2005; a copy of such approval is attached hereto, with a copy of the approved development design standards. 7. The improvements to the project as set forth for the approved subdivision were approved on September 29, 2005, by the'City Council for the Chanhassen West Business Park creating 8 lots, 3 outlots and associated right-of-way for public streets (plans prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc., dated September 6, 2005). 8. All utility services are available to said property including water, sanitary sewer, storm water, electric, gas, and telephone in sufficient capacity for the project. 9. The Chanhassen City Council approved on September 29, 2005, Site Plan Planning Case ##05-27, for a 46,152 square -foot office warehouse building, plans prepared by Schoell and Madson, Inc., dated August 5, 2005, revised September 12, 2005, for Minger Construction on Lot 4, Block 2, Chanhassen West Business Park. 10. The project is located in Flood Zone C, which is not an area of high hazard for flooding and is considered an area of minimal flooding, Community Panel Number 2700510005 B, effective July 2, 1979. 11. There are no pending applications, staff initiated recommendations or administrative actions to change or amend the current zoning ordinance or zoning map or comprehensive plan so as to modify the permitted uses of the land upon which the project is Located or which would affect or impose additional conditions on the above described current use of the project or any tenant improvement, if any, remaining to be constructed at the project. Mr. Thomas J. Hughes and Carver County Abstract October 7, 2005 - Page 3 Should additional information be required of this office concerning the project, you may contact the undersigned. Si e Robert Generous, A1CP Senior Planner RG:k Enclosures: 1. Ordinance No. 399 adopted on August 22, 2005 2. Development Design Standards, Chanhassen West Business Park, Approved August 22, 2005 g 1pha\2005 planning cases105-23 chanhassen west business parklaoning letter chanhassen west business park.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO.399 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE, THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, BY REZONING CERTAIN -PROPERTY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS: Section 1. Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code, the City's zoning ordinance, is hereby amended by rezoning all property within the Chanhassen West Business Park from A2, Agricultural EstateDistrict; to PUD, Planned Unit Development (Office/Industrial) District. Section 2. The rezoning of this property incorporates the design standards contained in the - Planning Commission staff report dated July 19, 2005, as amended. Section 3. The zoning map of the City of Chanhassen shall not be republished to show the aforesaid zoning, but the CIerk, shall appropriately mark the zoning map on file in the Clerk's Office for the purpose of indicating the rezoning hereinabove provided -for in this ordinance, and all of the notations, references, and other information shown thereon are hereby incorporated by reference and made a part of this ordinance. - Section 4. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this Vd day of -August, 2005. ATTEST: Todd Gerhardt, Clerk/Manager Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on October 13, 2005) s'wV 07: 51 W. i 002 QW10DO COMMUNITY BANK CHANHA38EN OFFICE 44% Pond Promenade • PO Box 1177 • C11w&J1aswr1, .%JN 65317.92-727 2265 • F= 952-227.2424 • B-TrWL• ms )@cbchanhawn.rom October 7, 2005 City of Chanhassen Attention: Mr. Bob Generres 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen,, Minnesota 55317 Ka, fax RE: Zoning letter. Dear Mr. Generres: I am writing to request a zoning letter for the Chanhassen West Business Park Project that was recently approved by the City Council. Please verify for us that the project and Plat are properly zoned for the intended use as commercial building sites. Also I would like confirmation that the city utilities sufficient to serve the project are available at the Property boundaries. Please address the letter to Community Bank Corporation and also to Carver County Abstract & Title Company, who is providing a zoning endorsement to the bank. Thanks in advance for your assistance; we appreciate your help in this matter. I understand the fee for the letter is $25.00 and if you could please phone when the letter is prepared, I will hared -deliver a check and pick up the letter. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me directly at (952) 227 2405. Respectfully, Thomas J. Hughes Assistant Vice President Community Bank Corporation Chanhassen Office ,An Office of Community Bank Corporation 07:51 COMMu l I TY ww Cf4t4ASSEN 4 2271110 NO.651 0 COMMUNITY BANK CORP611ATION vCHANHASSEN OFFICE a 455 PONE] PROMENADE CHANH ASSEN MN 55317 952-227.240E-TOM HUGHES FAX: 552-227-2424 FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET TO: CITY OF CHANHASSEN FROM: TOM HUGHES ATTENTION: BOB GENERRES DATE: OCTOBER 7, 2005 FAX NUMBER: (952) 227-1110 TOTAL NO. OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER: 2 RE: ZONING LETTER REQUEST O URGENT O FOR REVIEW O PLEASE COMMENT O PLEASE REPLY C1 PLEASE RECYCLE NOTESICOMMENTS: Dear Bob, Please find to Follow the zoning Ietter request we discussed. 'thanks, Tom r� v O.=.= S F • Y i f N EWDOC f t x , Y 49 CITY OF CIIANUMSEN 77W MAe So lewl PO Sox 147 0whMIM55317 Administration Pi952227.10 fax: 952227.1110 Building Inspections Pt a 952227.1180 fax.952227.1190 Engineering fte,952227.1160 Faz W227.1170 Finance fte:952227.1140 FxT52227.1110 Park & Recreation Phom %2227.1120 POC 95Y.227.1110 pmea6ca sever 2310 Couie(Bou1e%wd R=952227.1400 Fax" 952227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources ftiorK~ 952227.1130 Fa)c %2227.1110 PublicWorks 1591 WROW H=952227.1300 Fax:952.227.1310 Senior Center 1'tW-952M.1125 F=952227.1110 Web Site WBWAdotm=mw August.9, 2005 Mr. Mark Undestad Eden Trace Corporation 8156 Mallory Court Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Chanhassen West Business Parr Planning Case #05-23 Dear Mark: On August 8, 2005, the Chanhassen City Council tabled the above referenced item to permit staff and the developer to investigate a secondary access in to the site and allow staff time to revise the design standards as directed by City Council. The city will be unable to complete its review of the project within the 60 day review period, which ends on August 16,<2005..I am, therefore, notifying you: that the city is extending the review period., as permitted by state statute, for up to an addit Onal.60 days (up to October .15, 2005) to complete the development review for the project. However, we have scheduled this project: to return to City Council on August 22, 2005, provided we can. get sufficient information to.address the second access and determine the implications of such a change to the subdivision in that time. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me -at. (952) 227-1131 or blrenerous@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. Sincerely, Robert Generous, AICP Senior Planner - The City of Chanhassen •Agrowingamityaiihdmanlakes. cm14sawls,adwrningdowr&+m,Whinglx>su s,wind gtra9k,andbeautifulparl&Agealplace tolive.xwk,andplay. CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION OCTOBER 10, 2005 Mayor Furlong called the work session to order at 5:40 p.m. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Furlong, Councilwoman Tjomhom, Councilman Peterson, Councilman Lundquist, and Councilman Labatt STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Justin Miller, Paul Oehme, Kate Aanenson, Greg Sticha, and Steve Torell CREATION OF ABATEMENT DISTRICT FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION OF LYMAN BOULEVARD, CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS PARK. Justin Miller explained what and how an abatement district works. He passed out paper copies of information that was hard to see on the computer. Todd Gerhardt explained that he's had preliminary talks with School District 112 and the County regarding the construction of a new secondary school scheduled for the Fall of 2009 and would like the upgrade of Lyman Boulevard to coincide with that construction schedule. Therefore the council needs to be looking at funding options now. Councilman Lundquist asked staff to explain the advantage of using abatement versus bonding. Todd Gerhardt explained how different governmental agencies will be impacted by an abatement district and another option the city could take is a wait and see approach and just. let the County do the upgrade project sometime in the future. Councilman Lundquist talked about having to do a sell job in the next year before development begins in Chanhassen West Business Park. Mayor Furlong stated this is a chance for government entities to work together to get things done efficiently and economically. Todd Gerhardt stated he felt School District 1.12 and Chaska should be supportive and that he would keep the City Council updated. DINT MEETING WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION. Planning Commission members present: Mark Undestad, Jerry McDonald, Debbie Larson and Dan Keefe. Kate Aanenson reviewed the projects and meetings the Planning Commission has worked on over the past year and explained how during their work sessions the commission members have taken tours of completed projects and proposed project sites, which have been very helpful. Dan Keefe stated the tours have been very beneficial and asked that given the recent 100 year rain events, if there's anything the Planning Commission should be looking at in their considerations. Todd Gerhardt explained what staff has learned in terms of storm water management planning from the Yoberry and Lake Harrison developments and the need to do a better job of educating the public on maintenance of emergency overflow areas. Jerry McDonald noted that after a visit to Woodbury and seeing the damage caused by flooding he sees the need to enforce ordinance and encroachment agreements regarding where structures can and cannot be built. Mayor Furlong noted that the update to the Surface Water Management Plan should show what's worked and what still needs to be done but that the Planning Commission should not ignore storm water aspects in review of plans. Jerry McDonald asked for additional education on storm water issues. Kate Aanenson explained that Kurt Papke is the Planning Commission CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 29, 2005 Mayor Furlong called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Furlong, Councilwoman Tjornhom, Councilman Peterson, Councilman Labatt and Councilman Lundquist STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Justin Miller, Roger Knutson, °Bali Generous, Paul Oehme, and Todd Hoffman PUBLIC PRESENT FOR ALL ITEMS: Danny DeHoyos Chad Varner Daniel Knighton Joseph Pittsley Tyler Hokanson Richard, Jeffrey & Robbie Lyman Brendan Harris Micah Baird Debbie Lloyd Janet & Jerry Paulsen Shayne Eyre PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: 921 Bluff Pass South 2438 Hunter Drive 17087 Hanover Lane, Eden Prairie 8218 Hillside Drive, Eden Prairie 2188 Grimm Road, Chaska 2441 Clover Field Drive, Chaska 18654 Vogel Farm Trail, Chaska 9648 Jonathon Lane, Eden Prairie 7302 Laredo Drive 7305 Laredo Drive 1100 Lake Susan Drive Mayor Furlong: Welcome everybody. We appreciate you joining us here this evening and for those watching at home as well. We do have some boy scouts in our gallery this evening from Troop 296 I believe so welcome to them as well. They're working on their citizenship in the community badge. At this time I'd like to ask if there are any modifications or changes to the agenda that was distributed with the packet. If not, without objection we'll proceed with the agenda as distributed. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Peterson moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded to approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: a. Approval of Minutes: -City Council Work Session Minutes dated September 12, 2005 -City Council Verbatim & Summary Minutes dated September 12, 2005 Receive Commission Minutes: -Planning Commission Verbatim & Summary Minutes dated September 6, 2005 o s -Z3 City Council Meeting — September 29, 2005 b. Resolution#2005-79: Call Assessment Hearing for TH 3121212 Improvements, Project Numbers 03-09, 04-05, 04-06. C. Resolution#2005-80: Call Assessment Hearing for 2005 MUSA Improvements, Phase I, Project 04-05. e. Approval of Registered Land Surveys for: Resolution#2005-81: Lot 6, Block 1, Christmas Acres, Subdivision #05-02. Resolution#2005-82: 860,890 and 910 Pleasant View Road, Subdivision #05-09. f. Approval of Amendment to City Code Relating to the Disposal of Unclaimed Property, including Summary Ordinance for Publication Purposes. g. Approval of City Code Amendment to Chapter 6, Article III Concerning Watercraft Operating Regulations. h. Approval of Reassignment of Landscaping Requirements, Highlands at Bluff Creek. j. Chanhassen West Business Park: 1) Approval of Final Plat. 2) Resolution#2005-82A: Approval of Plans & Specifications and Development Contract. k. Resolution#2005-83: Order Preparation of Feasibility Report for 2006 Street Improvements, Project 06-01. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Rick Dorsey asked that item 1(d) be pulled for discussion. Mayor Furlong stated the item will be discussed after new business. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: Janet Paulsen: Council people. My name is Janet Paulsen and I live at 7305 Laredo Drive. I wish to address the subject of the Harvieux subdivision. Mayor Furlong: Mrs. Paulsen, would it be okay if we brought that up during, when we're discussing that? Janet Paulsen: Sure, that'd be fine. Mayor Furlong: That will be fine. I'll make time for public comments. Would anybody else like to address the council during visitor presentations this evening? No? Okay. We offer this every evening so people are welcome to come each meeting. 2 SCANNED R v� 4 M �i �i r . .f S Y NEWDOC ® oG -z3 City Council Meeting —August 22, 2005 Councilman Lundquist: Sergeant Olson, where are we at with the extra deputies or the, are you fully staffed up now with traffic detail and the extra deputy for that? Sgt. Jim Olson: Yes. As of, the month of July was actually the first complete month where we've been up to full staff. So that probably helped a bit. Councilman Lundquist; I have to believe that's why there was 537 traffic stops. Sgt. Jim Olson: Absolutely, yes. And they've been hitting some different areas very hard that they've been targeting. We've really been targeting the Powers Boulevard, Lake Lucy Road, Kerber Boulevard intersections trying to curtail the passing on the right. We've been hitting that very, very hard and fast for quite a while, but especially last month so. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. Sgt. Jim Olson: I also just wanted to bring up school will be in session shortly and in a couple of weeks, so motorists need to be careful when they're driving through neighborhoods and school zones to slow down. Keep an eye on what you're doing and the kids that will be walking to school and standing at bus stops, and deputies will be doing extra enforcement in school zones and in neighborhoods when schools are in session and kids are going back and forth to school. And if residents are having traffic issues in their neighborhood, Iencourage them to give us a call, either at the sheriff's office or they can even call me personally at 952-227-1601 and we can have some deputies monitor the situation, and also our traffic enforcement, traffic education car that we have now. Any other issues or anything for the sheriff's office at all? Mayor Furlong: Anything else for Sergeant Olson? No? Very good. Sgt. Jim Olson: Have a nice evening. Enjoy the weather. Todd Gerhardt: I don't see Mr. Geske. Mayor Furlong: We have his report in the packet. Things seem to be going pretty steady there so if any issues come forward we can bring it up at our next meeting. Are there any questions that the council members have that the City Manager can relay back to the Fire Department? No? Okay. Thank you. CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS CENTER LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LYMAN BOULEVARD AND GALPIN BOULEVARD, EDEN TRACE CORPORATION• REQUEST FOR REZONING OF PROPERTY FROM AGRICULTURAL ESTATE (A2) TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD); PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL AND WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT. Public Present: 3 SCANNED • 0 City Council Meeting — August 22, 2005 Name Address Peter & LuAnn Sidney JoEllen Radermacher Sarah & Steve Dale Ben Merriman 2431 Bridle Creek Trail 2479 Bridle Creek Trail 2487 Bridle Creek Trail Eden Trace Corporation Kate Aanenson: Thank you. As you indicated Mayor, this is a continuation from the last meeting so staff was given some direction to work with the applicant to resolve a couple of issues so I'd like to go through those at this time and Paul Oehme, the City Engineer will also be addressing a portion of this regarding traffic. Again the subject site is located at the corner of Lyman and Galpin, the northwest corner. Some of the issues regarded design issues and those modifications have been made in the design standards which start on page, of your staff report, page 4. ...permitted uses we did take out the hotel/motel as a possible use. The other thing that was talked about was building height. Building of the lots facing Trotters Ridge would be limited to two stories or 30 feet in height, so that's a restriction of height on both of those. One of the issues that also came up revolved around signage. The current city sign ordinance states that there should be no lighting abutting residential districts so that would include Galpin. There'd be no perimeter signs on the buildings facing Galpin or to the north which would be facing be Ridge. The sign ordinance does allow internal signage and it also allows signage facing Lyman and those could be eliminated. Just want to clarify too we are recommending that there be a sign, a business park identification sign on that, on Galpin to get identification to go into that business park and then once you get in there'll be internal lit signs, again per city ordinance, but that modification has been made. Again site lighting, consistent with the city ordinance on individual lots be directed downward. Again consistent with the city ordinance. And also we modified a couple other conditions in your staff report and those would be condition number 48. Those have been met. The registered engineer. Condition number 53. The developer shall either dedicate Outlot C to the City for open space purposes or dedicate a conservation easement over Outlot C. They're willing to dedicate or do the conservation easement. Either was acceptable to the applicant. Again we're still working on the drainage issue and that will come in with the details on the next level of final plat and that's for the drainage issue on Lot 2 in Trotters Ridge on Lots 5 and 6 and Outlot C... Again the building setback along Lot 6 would still be the 100 foot and we're looking at that berm in that area. There would be no berming in the wetland or the treed area here. Over the wetland again implications to the saving the trees and the impact to the wetland. So with that the other recommendation was the traffic study and I'll let Paul Oehme, the City Engineer address that. Paul Oehme: Thank you. Mayor, City Council members. As the council directed, we did approach the County on the issue of the right-in/right-out along Lyman Boulevard. The County did direct or request that the developer look at a traffic study in this area to see if a right-in/right- out would improve the situation, and how that would potentially impact or improve the situation in the long term. The applicant did hire a traffic consultant, TDI to look at this particular development and the right-in/right-out issue. The report has been included in your packet so I won't go through that in too detail but bottom line is, the traffic study did not come back with any improvements, significant improvements to this area and long term future needs of both the corridor on Galpin and Lyman Boulevard. Based upon those findings from the traffic study, the .1 City Council Meeting — Auuust 22, 2005 . , County did not wish to have that access be made at this time. Full access be provided off of Galpin. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Anything else from staff at this, yeah okay. Kate Aanenson: Staff was also asked to evaluate the impacts regardless of what the traffic study said. To look at the impact of the road, a second entrance on Lyman. As the City Engineer indicated, the County was not supportive of that but if the council was to choose, it has significant impacts. The tree preservation area. There's two alternatives shown here. Saving the trees on one side, or saving the trees on the other side to give back, so it definitely has an impact on the preservation area. So staff again declares not recommending that secondary entrance at this time. So with that we are recommending approval with the conditions in the staffireport and we'd be happy to answer any questions. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for staff. Councilwoman Tjomhom: Kate, can you show.me Outlot B and the berming that is going in on Lot 5? Kate Aanenson: There is a wetland right here. There is significant setback that exceeds what's required so what the staff is recommending based on the elevation of that building, the two stories, that we would look at that as part of site plan review. There's a 14 foot buffer there to see when that site comes in, what's the appropriate screening depending on the height and trying to get a berm in there. It meets the setback requirements so by putting a berm in you're actually penalizing, so we're trying to see what we can do to, based on elevations. We believe that a modest berm can be put in with trees on top that would provide a very effective screening base on the existing setback. Councilwoman Tjomhom: But you will work. Kate Aanenson: With that when it comes in for site plan, correct. Again each building will come through. Mayor Furlong: Any other questions? Councilman Lundquist: On that berming Kate, with that, assuming that that's now a two story building, does that allow any modifications in the parking at all or anything like that to push those buildings further to the south? Kate Aanenson: Sure. Councilman Lundquist: To increase that setback. Kate Aanenson: Again that's a hypothetical square footage, which we showed for illustrative purposes but certainly when that comes in that'd be something we'd look at to try to maximize that. That would be the goal. 5 0 . City Council Meeting-- August 22, 2005 Councilman Lundquist: So we can always increase that if we want to at that time. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. And then Paul, on the traffic study, or Mr. Mayor, and maybe this is a question for you that. How do they, as I read through there, how does TDI, how do they determine where the traffic's going to come from and to and from and which direction they're going and all of that? All of that information that they used. Paul Oehme: Yeah, the TDI did use the ITE trip generation manual to determine the traffic projections and it's consistent with the daily traffic that we had estimated. The percentages were allocated. Typically allocated. In terms of where the population centers are. Typically you know we would envision most of the traffic going to the Minneapolis -St. Paul downtown areas versus out west farther. Just as an educated rule of thumb. Councilman Lundquist: Okay, so they use that empirical and then based on population centers and types of businesses and the expected route to get there? Paul Oehme: Correct. Councilman Lundquist: Is that kind of what their methodology is then? Paul Oehme: Yeah. A lot of the analysis was heavily weighted toward the 212 connection... Councilman Lundquist: Okay, that was going to be my next question. Does that assumes that 212's is in there too? Paul Oehme: That's correct. Councilman Lundquist: Yep. That's all I had, thank you. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Other questions for staff. Kate, question on a couple of the proposed changes or a couple of the modifications in the staff report. Try to get back to my spot here. The first one deals with the signs and the lighted signs. Did I understand you that the ordinance, our current city ordinance doesn't allow lighted signs towards residential. Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Mayor Furlong: So under our ordinance there wouldn't be lighted signs to the east across Galpin towards the Stone Creek or to the north across the property line to the Trotters Ridge development. Under our current ordinance. Kate Aanenson: That's correct. 5 ® 0 City Council Meeting — August 22, 2005a. Mayor Furlong: Okay. And, but as I read this under Section G(7), it would prohibit, it would go beyond what our current ordinance says and not allow them anywhere. Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Mayor Furlong: Even towards other industrial areas or down towards Lyman. Kate Aanenson: 'Right. Where they wouldn't be seen internally. So if you wanted to modify that, just say. Mayor Furlong: I mean our current ordinance. Kate Aanenson: Per city ordinance. Mayor Furlong: Okay. And I guess that's the question. If something's not addressed within the PUD standards in the ordinance. Kate Aanenson: If it's silent then you go back to the underlying ordinance. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. The other question was on the site lighting which was. Kate Aanenson: That'd be number 5 on page IO I believe. Mayor Furlong: Yeah, Section 8, Lighting. Is there site lighting shall be directed towards in the interior of the individual lots. As I was .reading the other preceding standards there, we already have standards in there with regard to. :Kate Aanenson: It's half foot at the property line. Mayor Furlong: Excuse me? Kate Aanenson: The current city ordinance says a half foot at the property line. Half foot candle. And it might be better to put something. Mayor Furlong: And that's number 4 there, correct? Kate Aanenson: Yeah. So you've kind of got, I'm not sure if there's anything qualifying under number 5. Mayor Furlong: Yeah, and I guess my question is, as I see this, if number 4, if somebody has a building and they've got lights for security purposes on the side of that building, they already have to be shielded and they have to be at a half candle lamination by the time they get to the property line. Kate Aanenson: That's correct. 7 • • City Council Meeting — August 22, 2005 Mayor Furlong: Okay. And number 5 here, could that be interpreted that the lights on the buildings would not be allowed since they might be pointed away from the interior and we'd have to have poles of lights around the property line? Kate Aanenson: Yeah. That's kind of how that reads. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Kate Aanenson: So be directed towards the interior. That might be hard. Mayor Furlong: Alright. I just wanted to make sure I was reading that correctly, Okay, thank you. Any other questions for staff? Councilman Lundquist: One other follow up. We talked a little bit before Kate. The conservation easement on the dedication and the clarification for the permanent conservation easement. Talk about, as it reads now and just clarify. If I understood you correctly, that, because of the density transfer that we're doing here, that there isn't any, that essentially becomes a permanent easement because of the density on the rest of the site? Kate Aanenson: That's correct, because by approving the site plan you've said that that's an outlot and in that outlot we'll put restrictions regarding what you can do with that which is pretty much nothing, you know trimming trees they'd have to verify with us so that's the intent. It has no building value on an outlot. You can't build on an outlot. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. And what would be the change if we were to add that word permanent in there at all? Kate Aanenson: I'm not sure if the City Attorney wanted. Adding the word permanent to the conservation easement as opposed to just a conservation easement. Roger Knutson: It's fine to add it. Kate Aanenson: If they were to remove it from the outlot status they'd have to come back before this body and ask. Roger Knutson: I mean it's permanent anyway until you. Councilman Lundquist: Until you change it. Kate Aanenson: Right. Roger Knutson: Change it. As you say it's permanent, you still can change it. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. E City Council Meeting — Auupust 22, 2005 Mayor Furlong: On the dedication, just to follow up on your question. The difference is whether the title is held by the city through dedication or whether it's held by. Kate Aanenson: Because sometimes people feel that might be an additional extraction or compensation so it is something that we'd negotiated. Some people are comfortable giving it to the city. Some people want to maintain that control, so the city's not in there doing something. So it's something we generally negotiate with the developer. The goal is that it stay in perpetuity as the trees. Councilman Lundquist: Which we would have more control if we did a dedication to the city versus a conservation easement. Kate Aanenson: Could. Councilman Peterson: ...have to maintain it right? Kate Aanenson: That's correct. That's sometime is a problem too. Yeah, trees fall down or whatever. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. Good point. Todd Gerhardt: Kate, are they using that as a part of their impervious surface? Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Todd Gerhardt: So if we took ownership of that, could they still get credit for that? Kate Aanenson: We've done that before where we've taken the ownership of it. Mayor Furlong: Any other questions at this time for staff? Maybe some follow up. Mr. Merriman, from an applicant standpoint, anything you'd like to add this evening? Ben Merriman: Not at this point. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. I don't .know, we did receive substantial public comment at our last meeting. I certainly want to make sure we have an opportunity if people want to be heard as well so I would allow and invite people to come and make public comments on this matter. My request would be that we focus on the changes and the additional information that we received tonight rather than going back and re -visiting other points but if anybody is interested in providing the council with their comments I would certainly invite them forward now. Please come forward and state your name and address. LuAnn Sidney: Mayor Furlong, City Council, staff and applicant. My name is LuAnn Sidney. live at 243113ridle Creek Trail. I'd like to make a few comments concerning Eden Trace's proposal. First I would like to thank staff and the applicant for all the effort that has gone into this proposal and for being sensitive to the concerns of neighbors in making this a PUD. I agree 0 • City Council Meeting — August 22, 2005 with the proposed revised conditions and amendments to the current staff report and I'd like to emphasize a few additional points which I emailed this weekend. Condition 2, I'd like to see the addition of a statement about tree preservation fencing being placed at least 2 feet beyond the drip line, and that will help preserve some of the mature oaks that are in that area. And then condition 36(k). I would like to add that condition to show the proposed contour lines, the proposed contour lines for the berm between Outlot B and Lot 5. And I would like to have it there just for the future to show people when they come to investigate the property what we've come up with for a preliminary plat. And I'd also like to make sure that we make Outlot C a permanent conservation easement because outlots are outlots and they can be changed and I think the word permanent would serve us well and preserve those trees for the future. Thank you again and especially I'd like to thank the applicant for your time, effort and patience of this proposal. Thanks. Mayor Furlong: Excuse me, Ms. Sidney. Could you repeat your second request for my benefit. LuAnn Sidney: Condition 36(k). Councilman Labatt: Is that a new one? Councilman Lundquist: Yes. LuAnn Sidney: Yeah. Can't help it. Show the proposed contour lines for the berm between Outlot B and Lot 5. And that will provide some guidance for the future when that lot develops. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Councilman Peterson: Anything problematic with either of those Kate? Kate Aanenson: No. Sarah Dale: Sarah Dale, 2487 Bridle Creek Trail. Our concern is that there is no berm required between Outlot B and Building 5 and I'd like to see something to give us some protection for the future for that building. It's a distance but we still think we need a berm with trees. The developer has said he has no problem with that and there is room for it there so we'd like to see something required so that we do have that protection. JoEllen Radermacher: Good evening Mayor and council members. My name is JoEllen Radermacher. I live at 2479 Bridle Creek Trail. Our home does back right up to the outlot, building number 5, Outlot B there and I do concur with LuAnn and Sarah on our request to have a berm. The wetland area. There's no trees. It's a grassy area. We would have very visible views of this building. It not only would help protect us but it would also encourage the wildlife that does live in our area that we'd like to see maintained also. We also, there was a previous and unless I misunderstood there was a reference made to other buildings, business parks that are built within residential areas and I think one of those Chanhassen Lakes. And we went and measured those buildings. We thought they were more like around the 20 foot with parapet so we'd like to have some consideration to 25 foot with parapet to be in conjunction with those 10 City Council Meeting -- August 22, 2005e areas. And also the type of structure that was used with the color of the stone and the texturized. We thought that that was very nice looking concept. Thank you very much. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank. you. Chris Butcher: Good evening. I'm Chris Butcher from 2407 Bridle Creek Trail and I too want to thank the applicant and city staff for all the efforts in trying to make a nice transition between the business park and our homes for us. I just want to point out that I am one of the four homes that directly abuts the building, Lot number 6, and just want to make the statement that when we moved into our home we knew that this property was going to be developed at some point. The development wasn't the surprise to us. The proposed or potential building size was shocking to us so the fact that perhaps a 4 story building that spanned 4 lots, that was shocking tows. We appreciate the effort that have been put forth to try and modify that for us. We'd still like additional, a little bit more though. Little extra effort. Too, looking at the building heights and what we'll be looking at when we sit at our dinner tables each evening, and the fact that there would be even a 2 story building out there. And then the setback. I know I talked about it in e- mails to you a couple times about potential 150 foot setback and I'm not, I don't, I haven't heard anything else about that but looking at the possibility that if it were to be stipulated now, that where a berm with 150 foot setback, so when someone who does come in to put a building there, that that is already stipulated so we can have the additional berming and buffering. So thank you very much. Joel Lehrke: Joel Lehrke, 2329 Boulder Road. I did ask staff this evening to bring the preliminary materials that they have for one of the buildings. I see Kate did bring that. One of the concerns I had that we talk about at the previous meeting was quality construction materials, but. we actually didn't have a true definition of what quality construction. materials would be and I thought it would be a good idea this evening if you as the City Council could see what the first idea was. I haven't seen it myself so I'll be seeing it for the first time too, if Kate would be willing to lay it up here in front of the camera and just point a few things out about it. The other comment I do have is transition. I've talked to a few of you again today representatives. We won't go in too much with the concept plan but I do know you have a concept plan but that's also why we have City Council. This was planned in 1991. It didn't. say where it was put in stone. That's why I think we have you there is to make determinations saying does this really fit... forefathers were thinking out there. My opinion still on this is that it should have a better transition on the north and on the east side of more of an office building than a warehouse type thing. That the density is too high as the previous lady stated. These buildings are quite, quite large and while we talk about an IOP, the only difference I really think between this PUD and the IOP is these buildings maybe don't have evaporators or such thing as that on them yet, which is nice not to have. Don't get me wrong, but we're looking at some pretty massive building sites for a transition. I think the building sites still could look better. I. don't think anything's going to happen tonight. I think you should think about it in the future that just putting huge warehouses in and saying it's not quite as bad isn't really a correct statement. It is. So with that I do ask that we do take a look and see what their idea of quality construction material is for the first building. Thanks. 11 0 • City Council Meeting — August 22, 2005 Mayor Furlong: Anybody else that would like to speak from a public comment standpoint? No? Okay. Well thank you. We appreciate your comments this evening and those that we received by phone and e-mail as well. I guess for staff here, Ms. Aanenson, some of the questions I think indirectly was asked with regard to the 2 foot, beyond the drip line. Is that, as well for Mr. Merriman. I mean is that a? Kate Aanenson: The City Forester, before you can begin construction inspects to make sure all fencing is up and is in the appropriate location so. Mayor Furlong: So the appropriate location may be, I mean 2 feet. It may be at the drip line. It may be more than 2 feet. Kate Aanenson: Right, exactly. So. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. With regard to the contours. Kate Aanenson: That's fine. I think when it comes back for final plat we can certainly show that. And that would be (k). 36(k). Mayor Furlong: And the conservation easement, permanent again? Kate Aanenson: That's fine. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. And then there was the issue brought up about the berm on Outlot, between B and Lot 5. Kate Aanenson: I think this question was asked a couple different ways. If you look at this plan, this is a 100 foot setback so that's this line right here so this building is already set back about 150 feet. So it's set back quite a ways so if we were to push it back further, you know the goal is here, there's room in here. If we'd like to put a condition on there that when it comes back for final plat we show some contours and how it would based on the current location, how that would, similar to what we're saying on the other ones. Show how that would work. But I'm not sure pushing it forward, and I'm not sure if the intent is to get high berm that this one, because you're either setting back further or you're moving it closer and doing a berm. It's, so I'd certainly add. The goal is to put additional trees and the developer's already agreed to that. Mayor Furlong: Between B and Outlot, and the building on 5? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Do you want to comment on this? Ben Merriman: Basically there's only 16 feet to work with. We have a setback from the wetlands and then if I'm correct iVs about another additional 16 feet? And in that 16 feet if we had to do a berm, it would have to be a 3 to 1 and then we could undulate the berm as well to try 12 City Council Meeting -- Auust 22, 2005 is to, so it isn't just a big line, but you're only really going to be able to work with a 3 to 1 slope within the .16 feet. Kate Aanenson: ...condition to that effect because we don't know what the shape of that building's going to be so within that secondary setback, outside of the wetland buffer, that we would work to put a berm in, in that 16 feet. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. Looking here there was the issue of the berming. This was I think on Lot 6. 150 foot setback currently for Lot 6. There's 100 foot buffer if I'm not mistaken from the north property line. And there's no additional setback. I think. we talked last meeting about, what the developer's planning to do within that 100 foot buffer from a, I don't know terrace berming or some sort of undulated. Ben Merriman: Yes. Mayor Furlong: Okay, so maybe understanding that a little bit better what they're planning to do but, and if I recall the issue was, and it. was brought up, you know is there, is there anything available there to go beyond the 100 foot without going into Outlot C. and so I guess that was. Ben Merriman: Basically there isn't. I mean if we take another 50 feet. and come south with that property line 50 feet, then we have to take the equivalent amount of square footage into Outlot C and it can be on either side, on Lot 5 or Lot 6 but we'd have to squeeze that dedicated area in by the same amount of square footage. Mayor Furlong: Okay. And then the other question I saw was on the materials. Question about materials being proposed. Kate Aanenson: There is a project moving forward that will be going to the Planning Commission assuming this gets a recommendation and they come back for final plat, that would be one of the conditions. It'd be this building, Lot 4, which is the most interior backing up to Chaska on the other side of the wetland. So this would be the face from the cul-de-sac which would be, so this would be facing in. So there'd be a building in front of it. If you could zoom in on that for one second. So there would be a building, maybe it's better to show you on the colored drawing. So there would be a building sitting in front. It'd be this building behind so when you'd come in you'd have this elongated driveway going back. I'm sorry, now you can zoom back out. So there is burnish block, split face rock on both sides. Articulated. It hasn't gone to Planning Commission. Staff is working on the staff report right now regarding intensity of colors but it is a highly articulated building, similar to what. we have in the Chan Business Center. And I just want to add one other comment regarding the city did contemplate a land use recommendation. It was revisited, the land use recommendation and that's in the very beginning of the staff report. There was a proposal brought before the city to look at a transition of medium density, some office industrial. That was rejected by the neighborhood and actually pursued it through the court system and so that's why when we updated the comprehensive plan we did not revisit the land use change. Because we got the indication the neighbors preferred the office industrial land use. 13 0 • City Council Meeting — August 22, 2005 Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any follow-up questions from council or anything else that we heard? Okay. Alright. Good information. At this point I'll bring it back to the council for discussion. Some of the additional information we received this evening. Where'd we like to start? Councilman Peterson or Councilwoman Tjornhom. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Alright, I'll take it I guess. I like the first one. I think this is a good example of neighborhoods and developers getting together and working out their problems. I think it came a long way from where it started on the Planning Commission 2 weeks ago to right now. I tend to be very sympathetic with homeowners in these neighborhoods because they were here first. You know you're the one that has invested your families in your future in this city and that's why we are who we are and so you need to be protected and heard and I hope that you felt like that happened. That you know this is going to, this is here in front of us and I hope you felt like you were heard and that you could make the changes you needed so you can blend in with this development and make it work for everybody. Some of the issues were, you know understanding traffic volumes and what works best and did we tackle that issue and figure it out? I say yes. That we did unturn most stones that we could to figure out entrances and right- ins/right-outs and so I think we should be proud of ourselves for being able to do that. Tree preservation. That's a big thing in our city for us and did we do that? Did we try to do the best we can to protect the natural assets we do have which are our trees and I would say, yes again. I think the developer did a good job in respecting that and in following through with that commitment. And the last issue I think we had was just trying to protect neighbors from unsightly views and you know that I still think is a work in progress on final plat to come back. It can be tweaked more and I think that in the end we can all leave and feel good about what has happened here tonight so I will support this. Mayor Furlong: Alright, thank you. Councilman Labatt. Councilman Labatt: Tom I'm over here. Todd Gerhardt: They're all interchangeable. Mayor Furlong: They are. One of you go next. Councilman Lundquist: I would echo what Councilwoman Tjornhom stated before. I think a couple of the minor changes, the addition of condition 36(k) with the contour lines. Adding the permanent conservation easement on Outlot C. Adding a condition to construct a berm within the 16 foot wetland buffer on Lot 5 is a fine addition. The 150 foot setback on Lot 6, I think that my opinion is, from what we've seen from the staff and the developer that the 100 foot that we have, coupled with the way that they intend to build that berm as kind of having that against the wall with the smaller building that we're looking at here, will in effect give about the same, the same thing that pushing it back 50 feet is going to probably sacrifice more of the natural and I think the developer, we won't know until we see the final I guess and we'll never know what that building looks like until then but I'm comfortable with that, with the way it is on that as the developer's talked about it. I think Mr. Mayor as you talked about the conditions on the signs in the interior lighting, I would support the removal of those and just go with I think the ordinance offers protection and doesn't muddy the waters so much there as that so I would support the 14 a City Council Meeting — August 22, 2005 removal of that. I forget the numbers and letters are on those two conditions. On the interior lighting and the signage as well. Lighted signage so with that I would support the proposal as well. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Councilman Labatt. Councilman Labatt: Thanks Tom. Mayor Furlong: I'm looking your way this time. Councilman Labatt: I'll save my one thing here for last but I guess this is a project where this developer has developed in Chanhassen and has always done quality projects so were not dealing with a company here that is going to just put up tin boxes. So 'I think that the neighbors can feel rest assured that these buildings will be of quality looking buildings with nice features. I guess I'm in agreement with everything that's been mentioned by Councilwoman Tjomhom or Lundquist as far as all the additions and amendments and deletions. I'm still torn and concerned about the traffic and the traffic study and how can they predict where the work force, where the people are going to be working in these buildings and occupying them. Are they going to come from downtown? Are they going to come from Chaska? Victoria and —offices and how do you predict that and using this ITE manual to figure out that most of your traffic is going to come from the east. I just have a hard time looking at that and accepting that. If you're going to come from 212 and either come across Lyman or you're going to proceed through the intersection at Galpin and take a right in into your office for the morning, or you're going to take a left onto Stone Creek. Or take a right on Stone Creek and a left. Or right on Galpin and a left on Stone Creek, so I'm not happy with that. But I'm going to accept it because that will be 4 to I if I don't so. Other than that, that's about it. I'm not happy with the report but I'm going to have to live with it. Mayor Furlong: Alright, thank you. Councilman Peterson. Councilman Peterson: I would agree with all of my fellow council people. 'I think the additions since last week and this week have made it a better project and we should move ahead. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. This is one of those projects where the process is, becomes as important as the final result. I think in this particular case between the participation of residents and other interested parties the cooperation of the applicant and staff from the very beginning and trying to work out what's best for most. I think this is an example where really the process has worked. There is never going to be a perfect project when you have competing interests, and here we do have competing interests. Even within some of the neighbors. Some of the residents. And ultimately as I mentioned to a number of people that I spoke to prior to the meeting and I'll say it here publicly is while it's our job as much as anything else is try to find balance and to do it within the law within the ordinance and to make sure that we try to get the best project that we can for the City of Chanhassen. That should be all of our goals and I know I, I'm comfortable that our council up here seeks to do that. To balance the interest of the property owner with their right to develop and those of the neighbors with their, what they have now. What they see now and what they're going to see and other interests in terms of safety and storm water issues, 15 0 i City Council Meeting — August 22, 2005 drainage issues and such like that. I think we've done that. I think with regard, as Councilman Lundquist mentioned, items that were added in the development plan, G(7) and H(5), I think our ordinance provides sufficient protection. My concern is that with these two, when we're talking about sign lighting shall be directed interior. I can look at that and say one interpretation is that all lighting has to be on the perimeter of the property line and focused in. I don't think that's what anybody anticipates. You know prisons do that and that's not what we're looking for here. But lighting on the side of the building for security purposes that's properly shielded and with low illumination at the property line. I think that meets objections that people are looking for without perhaps causing some other problems so I appreciate Councilman Lundquist's supporting the elimination of those two. Again on details. The question with regard to the drip line. I appreciate Ms. Sidney's request there. I have full confidence in our forester that she's going to put that where it needs to be based upon the protection of the tree, and if that's 2 feet, if it's 4 feet or 6 feet, I think that's where it will be. The other ones with regard to contour lines, conservation easement, I guess from what I've heard tonight coming into tonight I was leaning towards the dedication of that outlot to the city. From what I've heard tonight for other reasons I prefer to see that as an easement, a conservation easement with the title not coming to the City. If that's acceptable to the developer. And so I'm confident as Councilman Labatt said that the developer's going to come forward with good developments. We'll have an opportunity to Iook at all the materials in the site plans as they come forward as well, which will give us further input into the process for all the neighbors and those most directly affected so I think we've got the best development here. Keeping all interested parties, all factors considered. I think it's going to be an asset to the city and for that reason I will be supporting this this evening, as it sounds like my fellow council members will too. We never get all the answers perhaps that we're looking for but I don't think anybody can say that we haven't asked the questions and in some cases we've asked them 2 or 3 times and that's what we can do. With that I think we can move forward here. Steve. Councilman Labatt: Well I just wanted to, for Kate. The maximum building height for Buildings 5 and 6. Make sure we're all clear on what. Kate Aanenson: Two stories or 30 feet. Councilman Labatt: Okay. Mayor Furlong: Which is down from what we were looking at 2 weeks ago. Councilman Labatt: I just wanted to make that everybody knew that. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any other discussion on this? If not, Councilman Lundquist you want to take a stab at the motion you started last week. Two weeks ago. Councilman Lundquist: Kate do you want these in 3 separate ones probably? Kate Aanenson: That's where there's modification in some of those. 16 0 City Council Meeting August 22, 2005 td Councilman Lundquist: Yeah, okay. I.would move that City Council approve the ordinance rezoning the property located within Chanhassen West Business Park from A2 to PUD incorporating the development design standards as modified to eliminate, what were those two again? Mayor Furlong: Let me find them. I think it's, going to be clear. Councilman Lundquist: The interior lighting and. Mayor Furlong: G(7) and H(5) would be removed from the staff report. Make sure the lighted signs and the sight line issues, those were added subsequent to the last report. ;ems Councilman Lundquist: So incorporating the design standards as modified with the elimination of those two, based on the findings of fact attached to the report., Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second? Councilman Peterson: Second. Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on that motion? Hearing none we'll proceed with the vote. Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Peterson seconded that the City Council approves the ordinance rezoning the property located within the Chanhassen West Business Park from Agricultural Estate District (A2) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) incorporating the development design standards contained within the staff report, modified to delete items G(7) and H(5), and based upon the findings of fact attached to the report. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Councilman Lundquist: I'd move that the City Council approves preliminary plat for Chanhassen West Business Park, plans prepared by Schoell & Madson dated June 17, '05 based on the findings of fact attached to the report, subject to conditions I through 54 with the addition of 36(k). To add the contour lines on Outlot B. No. Mayor Furlong: Yeah. Councilman Lundquist: Outlot B. And modification of condition 54. 53. Dedicate a permanent conservation easement for Outlot C and the addition of condition 55. That the developer shall construct a berm within the 16 foot wetland buffer on Lot 5. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Quick point. I'm sorry, go ahead. Kate Aanenson: You can't be in the wetland buffer zone, just for clarification. It's beyond now. There's another... 17 • 0 City Council Meeting -- August 22, 2005 Councilman Lundquist: Didn't I say wetland. Oh, I meant to say the setback. The 16 foot setback. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Outside the wetland buffer. Mayor Furlong: Question, clarification Councilman Lundquist. For the condition right about that 54, at our last meeting when we started working through this, I thought we took out references to the property to the north. There were drainage issues. The issue here is, I don't want to, I'm not trying to exclude Lot 2 but I don't want to exclude other lots along there as well. Councilman Lundquist: You're correct. Lots, in condition 54 should be modified to say drainage issues along Lots 5, 6 and OutlotC. Mayor Furlong: So that we cover all the. Councilman Lundquist: That would cover all of the developments, or all of the lots in Trotters Ridge. Thank you. Mayor Furlong: Is there a second? Councilwoman Tjornhom: Second. Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on that motion? Hearing none we'll proceed with the vote. Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded that the City Council approves the Preliminary Plat for Chanhassen West Business Park, plans prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc., dated June 17, 2005, based on the findings of fact attached to the report and subject to the following conditions: Applicant shall increase landscape plantings in the south and east property line bufferyards to meet minimum requirements. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted before final approval. 2. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to any construction activities. Fencing shall remain in place until construction is completed. 3. All trees shown as preserved on plans dated 6/17/05 shall be protected. Any trees damaged or removed shall be replaced at a rate of 2:1 diameter inches. 4. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). A Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for Water/Wetland Projects (Parts I and ED shall be submitted for the proposed project. The application shall include sequencing discussions and sequencing flexibility requests, if applicable. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. iV 0 City Council Meeting — August 22, 2005 5. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. 6. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 110010 of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation -(including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. 7. The proposed development shall maintain existing runoff rates and meet'NURP standards. Storm water calculations shall be submitted to ensure the proposed storm water pond is sized adequately for the proposed development. 8. Stable emergency overflows shall be provided for the proposed pond on site. The emergency overflows shall be clearly labeled on the plan and a detail is needed. The emergency overflows may be stabilized with a turf re -enforcement mat or fabric and riprap. 9. Notes on the plan describing timing of temporary stabilization with Type 1 mulch and seed or erosion control blanket and seed shall be included. The notes shall include timing of stabilization as well as the rate of mulch application (2 tons per acre, disc anchored). 10. All riprap/fabric at the flared end section shall be installed within 24 hours of flared end section installation. 11. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of Slime Time (Maximum time an area can Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area 10:1 to 3:1 14 days is not actively being worked.) Flatter than 10:1 21 days These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent. drainage ditch or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water. 12. Erosion control blanket shall be specified in the swale from the flared end section to the wetland along the west boundary of the site. The blanket specified shall adequately protect WE 0 i City Council Meeting — August 22, 2005 the area from designed velocity and depth of flow. The blanket and seed in the swale shall be installed within 5 days of culvert installation. Erosion control blanket is recommended for the pond slopes from around 952 to 942 contours. All blanket on the plan shall be shown as a shaded area. 13. Temporary sediment basins shall be installed prior to disturbing upslope areas. The areas of temporary sediment basins shall be labeled on the plan. A temporary outlet (e.g., a perforated riser and rock cone) shall be provided for the pond; details should be provided. Temporary basins shall be constructed in the area of the proposed permanent storm water pond, the southeast corner of the site prior to discharging to the culvert under Galpin Boulevard, and possibly in the northwest area of the site to handle water ninon from the north prior to discharge to the wetland. 14. Any and all area inlets or drop inlets in paved areas shall be protected with alternate controls[Wimco details. The engineer shall research and provide alternate designs for Wimco-type inlet controls to fit the various types of inlets. 15. Additional inlet controls shall be provided for adjacent inlets on Galpin Boulevard and Street A. 16. Silt fence shall be installed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond the wetland. 17. Type 1 and Type 2 silt fence locations shall be specified on the plan. Type 2 silt fence shall be installed around all wetland areas and in the southeast corner of the site to protect the culvert under Galpin Boulevard. The silt fence shall be extended along the south side to close the gap in the silt fence. 18. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. 19. The estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $413,661. 20. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase II construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval. 21. In lieu of parkland dedication and trail construction, full park fees shall be collected at the rate in force at the time of final plat for the proposed Chanhassen West Business Park. At current rates, the park fee would total $359,500 (35.95 x $10,000 per acre). 22. A demolition permit must be obtained before beginning demolition of any existing structures. 20 City Council Meeting -- A Rst 22, 2005 =; 23. Retaining walls over four high must be designed by a professional engineer and a permit must be obtained prior to construction. 24. Provide a water service for Lot 6. 25. A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. 26. Fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for fire protection is required to be installed. Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction except when approved alternate methods of protection are provided.. 27. The new proposed street will be required to have a street name. Submit proposed street, name to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval. 28. No burning permits will be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. _ 29. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed load of fire apparatus and shall be surfaced so as to provide all weather driving capabilities. Pursuant to Minnesota Fire code Section 503.2.3. 30. Temporary street signs shall be installed on street intersections when construction of a new roadway allows passage be vehicles. Pursuant to 2002.Minnesota fire code Section 501A. 31. Prior to final platting, storm sewer design data will need to be submitted for staff review. Depending on the size of the drainage area, additional catch basins may be required at that time. The storm sewer will have to be designed for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility easements will need to be dedicated on the final plat over the public storm drainage system including storm water ponds, drainage swales, emergency overflows, access routes for maintenance, over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, and buffer areas used as PVC. The minimum easement width shall be 20 feet wide. 32. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. 33. Private utility easements are required for the sanitary sewer and water lines that. serve Lot 4 but go through Lot 5. 34. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. 21 0 0 City Council Meeting— August 22, 2005 35.On the site plan: a. Revise the cul-de-sac pavement radius to 48 feet. b. Revise the parking driveway aisle from 24 feet to 26 feet wide. c. Revise the public street width from 32 feet to 36 feet wide. d. Increase the full access width off Galpin Boulevard to 44 feet and create three lane access. e. Shift Lots 1 and 8 easterly access further toward the west and realign the across each other. f. Show at least one, 6-foot wide, side walk along the public street. g. Show the access off Galpin Boulevard turning curb radius. h. Realign lot 5 access perpendicular to the shared driveway. i. Show street lights. j. Show handicap parks and ramps. 36.On the grading plan: a. Extend silt fence type between the storm pond and Outlot A. Silt fence Type 11 must be used adjacent to wetlands and storm pond. b. Revise contour lines to match 3:1 maximum slope and tie the proposed contour lines with the existing contours for Lots 4, 5, south of Lot 2 and northeast of Lot 1. c. Show the proposed contour lines for Lot 6. d. Show all retaining walls top and bottom elevations. e. Show all emergency overflows (EOF). The EOF must be 1.5' lower than the adjacent lowest floor. f. Revise Lot 6 parking slope to 0.7% minimum. g. Add a note to remove any existing structure and access off Galpin Boulevard and all disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. h. Show 75-foot minimum construction rock entrance. i. No retaining walls structure is allowed within public street and/or public utility easements, revise accordingly. j. Show 20-foot utility easement for the storm sewer between Lots 2 and 3 k. Show contour lines for the berm on OutIot B. 37.On the utility plans: a. Show all existing and proposed drainage and utility easements. b. Show the proposed sanitary and storm sewer stubs inverts. c. Add storm sewer schedule. d. Public storm sewer pipe type must be RCP and 15-inch minimum diameter. e. The last street accessible storm manhole (STMH#2) must be built with a sump. f. Revise sanitary sewer pipe from DIP to PVC-C900. g. On the utility profile show all sewer and pipe crossings. h. Minimum vertical separation must be 18 inches between watermain and sewer. i. Call out watermain fittings W City Council Meeting — August 22, 2005 s 38. Any retaining wall over four feet in height must be designed by a registered Civil Engineer in the state of Minnesota with an approved safety fence on top of it. Also, it will require a building permit from the Building Department. 39. Add the following City of Chanhassen Detail Plate Nos. 1002, 2109, 2110 2204, 3104, 3109, 5201, 5205, 5214 and 5215. 40. Prior to final plat approval, a professional civil engineer registered in the state of Minnesota must sign all plans. 41. All of the ponds are required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. 42. Cross -access easements for the shared driveway accesses must be obtained and recorded against the lots for each of the entrance drives. 43. Any off -site grading will require easements from the appropriate property owner. 44. Public utility improvements will be required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required at the time of final platting. The applicant will also be required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. The applicant must be aware that all public utility improvements will require a preconstruction meeting before building permit issuance. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. 45. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes and traffic control plans. The applicant should be aware that any off -site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. 46. All private streets are required to have 24-foot wide paved streets from back -of -curb to back - of -curb, be built to a 7-ton design and contained within a 40-foot wide private easement. At the completion of the project, the developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 7-ton design. 47. Six-foot wide sidewalks are required. 48. All of the proposed building pads must have a rear yard elevation at least three feet above the HWL of the adjacent ponds. 23 r 0 City Council Meeting -- August 22, 2005 49. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's Building Department. 50. Comply with Carver County memo dated June 28, 2005 and revise the plans accordingly. 51. Revise plan sheet size to 24 x 36 using scale 50. 52. The developer shall dedicate a permanent conservation easement over Outlot C." 53. The applicant shall work with staff to resolve any drainage issues along Lots 5, 6 and Outlot C. 54. The developer shall construct a berm within the 16 foot setback outside the wetland buffer zone on Lot 5. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Councilman Lundquist: Move the Chanhassen City Council approve the Wetland Alteration Permit to fill and alter wetlands within the development, plans prepared by Schoell & Madsen dated June 17, '05, subject to conditions 1 through 10. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second? We'll give that one to Councilwoman Tjornhom. Any discussion on that motion? Hearing none we'll proceed with the vote. Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded that the City Council approves the Wetland Alteration Permit to fill and alter wetlands within the development, plans prepared by Schoell & Madsen, Inc., dated June 17, 2005, subject to the following conditions: 1. A no loss determination shall be completed for Basin F 31-34. 2. Exemption requests shall be completed for Basins F 51-80 N, Basin F 91-97 and Wetland A. 3. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). A Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for Water/Wetland Projects (Parts I and II) shall be submitted for the proposed project. The application shall include sequencing discussions and sequencing flexibility requests, if applicable. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. 4. A five-year wetland replacement monitoring plan shall be submitted. The replacement monitoring plan shall include a detailed management plan for invasive non-native species, particularly purple loosestrife and reed canary grass. The plans shall show fixed photo monitoring points for the replacement wetland. The applicant shall provide proof of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland. 24 City Council Meeting — A®st 22, 2005 5. Several corrections must be made to the Wetland Mitigation Plan (sheet 10 of 13): a. Wetland A is shown as an impact area. Upon finalization of exemption paperwork, mitigation will not be required for this wetland; b. Wetland C (Basin F 87-90) is 0.05 acres in area; and c. Wetland D (Basin F 81-86) is 0.09 acres in area. 6. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 ffeet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. e 7. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. 8. Drainage and utility easements a minimum of 20 feet in width shall be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used as PVC and storm water ponds. 9. Silt fence shall be installed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond the wetland. 10. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase II construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval." All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Mayor Furlong: Thank you everyone. Appreciate your help in the process. Let's move on now to our next item. MINNEWASHTA CREEK HILL, 6560 MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY, ROBERT RICK OR PROPERTY OWNERS TIM & MARY COLLERA PLANNING CASE 05-151 SUBDIVISION WITH VARIANCES ON PROPERTY ZONED PUD-R. Kate Aanenson: Thank you. This request is located on Minnewashta Parkway just south of Highway 7. It's a request to divide one lot into 3 single family homes. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on this item on August 22" a and recommended 6 to 1 regarding the proposed development. The one no vote regarded consideration of the historic value of the home. Staff did include some pictures regarding that and did some research on that 25 �� . • S 1r NEWDOC z �- m i �r I � NEWDOC x r 1, City Council Meeting— August 8, 2005 Mayor Furlong: Sure, go ahead. Councilman Labatt: How much of this land does MnDot own? Bottom line. Todd Hoffman: How much, the whole corridor. Councilman Labatt: So if MnDot owns it and they're not going to get permission, then let's just make it for ease of enforcement sake, everything north like we've just proposed here, no hunting so that if people go out there and hunt, it's as clear as mud that the ordinance says no hunting north of Lyman. I mean I can't believe we're sitting here. Todd Hoffman: It's not, Councilman some of these areas that are owned by MnDot may still be farmed and the road may not affect them this fall, the construction, so that's what I think what you're saying. You can still hunt, some of the road right-of-way is still going to be cornfields. Councilman Labatt: We're trying to put a postage stamp here where a person can hunt out there in a small little parcel and it might be just easier, the ease of it just to say no hunting north of Lyman Boulevard. So that's all my comment. Councilman Lundquist: 1 would move to table item 1(e). Mayor Furlong: Motion made. Is there a second? Councilman Peterson: Second. Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Peterson seconded to table the amendment to the designated shooting areas in the city. All voted in favor, except Councilman Labatt and Mayor Furlong who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 2. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None. REQUEST FOR REZONING OF PROPERTY FROM AGRICULTURAL ESTATE (A2) TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PUD PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL AND WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LYMAN BOULEVARD AND GALPIN BOULEVARD; CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS PARK EDEN TRACE CORPORATION PLANNING CASE 05-23. Public Present: Name Address Abby Wilson 2332 Stone Creek Drive Ron Blum 2081 Stone Creek Drive 4 $CANNES) City Council Meeting — August 8, 2005 Gene Kruchoski 2030 Boulder Road Dan Luna 2483 Bridle Creek Trail Rodney Melton 2413 Bridle Creek Trail Mark & Chris Fischer 2407 Bridle Creek Trail Gayleen & Roger Schmidt 8301 Galpin Boulevard Jeff & Dee McGuire 2272 Stone Creek Lane East Dean Held 2230 Stone Creek Lane East Ben Merriman 8156 Mallory Court Helen & Gary Schock 2309 Boulder Road Peter & LuAnn Sidney 2431 Bridle Creek Trail Kevin DiLorenzo 2382 Stone Creek Lane West Barry LaBounty 2421 Bridle Creek Trail Thor Smith 2139 Boulder Road Amina Linkous 2208 Boulder Road Drew Dingman 2403 Bridle Creek Trail Mike Wright 2280 Boulder Road Rodney Melton 2413 Bridle Creek Trail Joel Lehrke 2329 Boulder Road Craig Johnson 2450 Bridle Creek Trail Bob Generous: Thank you Mayor, council members. As you stated this is a hearing regarding, there's two parts to it. First there's the rezoning. The property is currently zoned Agricultural Estate. It's guided in the comprehensive plan for office industrial uses. Under that land use. The appropriate zonings in the city code are either in IOP, Industrial Office Park or a Planned Unit Development. The applicant originally submitted a plan using an IOP concept. Upon initial review of that staff recommended that they proceed through a Planned Unit Development so that we could encourage and massage the project to save additional trees and topography in this site, so they came back and we were able to get the plat that's before you tonight. The rezoning from A2 to PUD. As part of the PUD the city establishes specific design standards for this project. We start with the IOP district regulations and we sort of distilled it down. In this instance we removed most of the auto related uses. We incorporated all of the design standards that we have for conditional uses and IOP and made them permitted uses subject to city approval. We've developed this based on other projects that we've had in the community. We think that we have provided some safeguards for the abutting property owners as well as providing good guidelines for the developer. We anticipate a quality development and this developer has come through under IOP zoning and done a good job on like Lake Susan, the business park on Lake Drive. Staff is recommending approval of the rezoning from A2 to PUD subject to approval of the plat. The second part of this project is the preliminary plat. This development would create 8 lots for development and 3 outlots. Outlots A and B contain wetlands and storm water ponds. Outlot C is the preserved area that we were able to maintain as part of this industrial development. It contains a significant stand of trees on the topographic separation from the east to the west. The outlot, one of the conditions of approval for the plat is either that they place a conservation easement over the outlot or dedicate it to the city for open space surfaces. The subdivision itself is straight forward. The 8 lots would be accessed by a private street that connects to Galpin Boulevard at Stone Creek Drive. We did look originally at providing access to Lyman Boulevard but the County directed the applicant to access off of 5 City Council Meeting — August 8, 2005_ Galpin only. So that's where the road connection came in. The applicant as part of the review process has worked on enhancing the buffering along Galpin Boulevard in the northern property line. In some instances they doubled the area of landscaping that's provided. It should be noted that the northern part of the site is approximately 17 feet lower than Galpin Boulevard at that area, and then it comes up and it's at grade at the entrance into the site. The southern property is slightly above Galpin Boulevard. We are working with the developer to try to lower that one site so that Lots I and 2 on the south side of the project can share a common truck area that, would screen their loading docks between the two buildings and provide a nice space on the perimeter of the site. Staff is recommending approval of the preliminary plat subject to the conditions in the staff report. As part of the preliminary plat and the grading plan there are wetland fillings that are taking place primarily in the pasture area on the east side but then there's some small wetlands that are scattered in the western portion of the site. They are providing wetland mitigation adjacent to the existing wetland in the southwest corner and they will be providing storm water ponding to treat the storm water within the development. Staff is also recommending approval of the wctland alteration permit. With that I'd be happy to answer any questions. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for staff. Councilman Lundquist: Bob you talked about some safeguards that staff had put in based on other IOP's and things throughout the city. Can you talk. specifically what those are? Bob Generous: Well primarily it's the separation and the landscaping requirements on the perimeter of the site. Additionally each of these lots will come in for site plan approval on an individual basis. At that time we'll look at additional screening for any truck areas or loading docks so that we can anticipate providing some noise attenuation for perimeter property. Also we're preserving through the PUD process that large outlot piece, approximately 4 acres and that in itself will add to screen this development and create a different environment than you would normally see under an industrial park. Generally when these come in they flatten the whole site so they can set their large pads in, but they've tried to maintain some of the topography and through the use of retaining walls created that area. Councilman. Lundquist: And the options for this zoning IOP or PUD, the IOP, is it accurate that the IOP zoning has much more of a, oh say industrial park feeling to it and not more of an office park? Bob Generous: That'd be correct, yes. Councilman Lundquist: And so who, does the developer choose or request the PUD or IOP or how did we arrive at PUD rather than IOP? Bob Generous: We negotiated with them. As they originally came in, we looked at their first plan and Outlot C was another industrial lot at that time. We suggested that they work on ways to preserve more of the natural area on the site. Through the PUD we're able to transfer intensity of development. Give more impervious surface on some of the lots by keeping this lot open and r K � City Council Meeting -- August 8, 2005 so we were able to, and primarily they were looking in the southern part of the site to increase the impervious area from 70% to above. Councilman Lundquist: Pushing the impervious down towards Lyman rather than towards Trotters Ridge. Bob Generous: Right. Correct. Kate Aanenson: Can I just further state that the IOP is permitted. I mean the straight IOP zoning which is a permitted and is consistent with the comprehensive plan so if they did request that, we suggested the PUD and the developer agreed to go that direction but either zoning district is consistent with the guiding of industrial in the comprehensive plan. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. Mayor Furlong: Any other questions? Councilwoman Tjornhom: Mr. Mayor. Bob, if you could, one of the main I think problems people are having is the entrance and exit offof this park, and if you could just go over briefly you know the process with MnDot and really what power or control we have as a council in deciding how, what happens and you know where we go from here. Bob Generous: Well I think Paul would be better at that. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Yeah, so I don't mean to put you on the spot but I mean that really seems to be a hot button and if you could address it. Paul Oehme: We did have several conversations with the County and the County has jurisdiction over both Galpin and Lyman. They're both A minor arterial roadway sections. Roadways out there, and Lyman Boulevard, from the County's perspective is a corridor they would like to maintain. Or eliminate as much access points as possible along that corridor. The traffic counts projecting traffic counts for the future of that roadway indicate that the amount of access points along that roadway should be limited just because of the east/west traffic getting to and from the west side of town into Chaska and back onto potentially 212. That's where they anticipate a lot of traffic to be heading. So eliminating access points where they're not warranted or they're hard to justify if there's not a T intersection, that's where the County has had issues. Our current ordinance also does try to limit access points on arterial collector roadways as well to a quarter mile of distance, so we're trying to follow our code and then also the County's requirements and recommendations for the separate corridor. Councilman Lundquist: Paul, how far between Galpin and Norex? Paul Oehme: About 1,900 feet I believe. Councilman Lundquist: Okay, so that's not quite half a mile. 41le of a mile or something. 31le of a mile. 7 f V City Council Meeting — August 8, 2005 �s Paul Oehme: Yeah, it's about 311& of a mile. And the newer intersection point, if you refer back to the site plan, would potentially be about 1,000 feet away from Galpin Boulevard, and the property south of this property under consideration tonight would, if that develop would have access off of Galpin, so that property, if and when it would develop would have access off of Galpin and out not have an access farther to the west. Mayor Furlong: Excuse me, just for clarification, when you say it has access off of Galpin. is the access going to come at the intersection of Galpin and Lyman? Paul Oehme: Galpin at the T there. 10 Mayor Furlong: Okay, where the T is now will become a 4 way. Paul Oehme: We would not anticipate another access for that property so this site at potentially new access points for the site. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Councilwoman Tjornhom. Councilwoman Tjomhom: No, that's okay. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Councilman Peterson: The residents had mentioned the timeliness of traffic studies. Can you walk us through when it was completed and not only what —shelf life of those are? Paul Oehme: Sure. Well we did look at traffic volumes based upon trip generations that are typically standard for these type of developments. We looked at that. s Bob Generous: Well using a worst case scenario for development we did provide an upper level of what the trip in's would be. A trip in is both entering and exiting so it could be someone going and leaving in the same ... but as part of the comprehensive plan we did look at this area as an office industrial site in conjunction with the rest of the city and the land use have been changed for this. As property has been developed, so we anticipated that it would be within the same parameters of this. Normally for industrial development if they reach 1,000, a million square feet in building area, then they trip the threshold for requiring an EAW. We felt that this project was small enough and that the projected traffic and potential increase was within the parameters of our study. Of our comprehensive plan. Paul Oehme: So we did look at trip generations for this new development. We also looked at existing trip generations within our own city comparables and we looked at Chanhassen Business Park First Addition off of Audubon and looked at traffic volumes that are currently generated and are really close to what potentially could be eventually built out at this time at this location and the trip generations at the existing site are extremely close to what we were anticipating for the new site to be so we're confident on the traffic volumes that. we have estimated for this site. City Council Meeting — August S, 2005 Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council members. Paul, wasn't that number your trip generation estimate right now for this development was about 2,600 cars per day. Is that what you were estimating? Paul Oehme: Between 24 and 26 depending upon full build out. What exactly would go in. Todd Gerhardt: And then our short little traffic counts that we took at Chan Business Center, didn't they come in about 2,400? Paul Oehme: 24 and we did a two day count there. Todd Gerhardt: So I think those two, I think Chan Business Center has about 345,000 square feet of office industrial space today and this development has about 350,000 future development once it's fully developed out. Would generate about the same number of trips so they're good comparisons. Paul Oehme: And we would anticipate a lot of this traffic, truck traffic and potential worker traffic to be coming from Lyman Boulevard onto Galpin. Once 212's built, that seems to be a logical corridor for truck and worker traffic to get back and forth to the proposed development because it is a major thoroughfare to downtown, to east of there and also west. Councilman Lundquist: So those counts that you did at the Chan Business Park, you took the counters out in the last week or two and put them out? Paul Oehme: That's correct. The counters that we took do not indicate vehicle type though. We don't have that capability. Councilman Lundquist: You're just counting how many times the tires go across the hose. Paul Oehme: Exactly. Todd Gerhardt: You know and depending on the uses that go in here, you've got the postal service trucks coming in and going so that may be a little higher volume than what you would see but you know on an average I think it's a pretty good indication of what you would see for traffic on this development. I think those are the estimates that we used when we put the comprehensive plan in. Those are the numbers that we used in planning for the upgrade of Galpin to the state it is today. There's also going to be plans in the near future of looking at Lyman Boulevard upgrade to an urban section, similar to what you see on Galpin. Paul Oehme: And potential signals at intersections as well. Todd Gerhardt: Correct. Councilman Peterson: There's been some discussion about the buffer between Galpin and... and where it stands today. If those would be extended it seems as though you're saving that N s r^ City Council Meeting — August 8, 2005 :. additional hard wood trees on the east, on the west side of the project. How is the buffer currently? I'm just trying to envision. Bob Generous: They're showing a 50 foot buffer area from the property line to the parking lot. What the developer said is that anything that comes off of the east side they're going to take out as Outlot C. to make up for it so once they start moving north, they're going into the grade too so they don't want to go any farther than if they try to maintain a 3 to 1 slope. Right now they're looking at the installation of a retaining wall along the end of Outlot C. to stop the grading. Councilwoman Tjomhom: And Bob, where are we on the number of stories for some of these buildings? ,1 Bob Generous: Well their plans only project that they'll have one story, and within the -design standards we provided for up to 3 stories and 40 feet. Under the industrial office park zoning, the permitted intensity is 4 stories and 50 feet. Councilman Peterson: Have you discussed with the developer the option of limiting it to two? Bob Generous: Yes we have and I'll let him address his response to it if you don't mind. Mayor Furlong: Anything else at this time? Councilman Labatt. Councilman Labatt: So Bob in page 2 of your report, the second paragraph towards the end there it says City Council can revise the design standards for building heights for Lots 1, 6 and 8 to 2 stories and 30 feet to address neighbors concerns. So we can. Bob Generous: You can change it. You could say go up to 4 or you could say go down to I. Councilman Labatt: Okay. And then in the Planning Commission summary on point 54. Your point was to follow the city code and have a 150 foot setback from the northeast corner, or on the northeast corner abutting Lot 6. I figure those are the 3 or 4 first homes in Trotters Ridge. That corner that. we're talking about, correct? Bob Generous: That is correct. Councilman Labatt: Okay. So they're recommending the 100 foot setback. Next paragraph down is staff believes that the recommended 100 foot setback buffer to the north complies with the city code. So you've got two interpretations of the same part of the code. Bob Generous: Right. The ordinance says that if the buffer yard is satisfactory to City Council, they can reduce the required buffer by half so the 100 foot width complies with the ordinance. Councilman Labatt: And so, you're inferring that there's a buffer, it is the natural vegetation and that stuff? 10 City Council Meeting — August S, 2005 Bob Generous: Partially and berming and screening. Landscaping that they're going to provide along that northwest, northeast corner of the site. Councilman Labatt: Okay. And then Lot 6, as mentioned earlier is 17 feet below the grade of Galpin. Is going to be a finished grade, correct? Bob Generous: Yes. The finished floor elevation they're proposing. Councilman Labatt: So if we take it from Galpin, and Lot 6 the finished grade is 17 feet below so, and we put a 30 foot building on there, you're looking at 13 feet above the grade of Galpin. Bob Generous: Right. Councilman Labatt: And how does that coincide that grade of Galpin to the grade of Trotters Ridge, the first 4 or 5 homes? I mean I couldn't find my grading plan so. Bob Generous: They're about 965 approximately. For the house locations. Galpin is higher then them also. It's 974 approximately right at the southwest. Southeast corner of Lot 1. Councilman Labatt: So Galpin is 9? Councilman Lundquist: 9 feet higher than the houses. Bob Generous: The first one may be built into that. We don't have the pads... Councilman Labatt: Then the height of the berm that they're proposing is like? Bob Generous: 6 feet. Councilman Lundquist: On the Galpin side or. Councilman Labatt: No, on the north. On the north side. What if we asked them to double that? Bob Generous: Then you'd have a 12 foot berm. Councilman Labatt: They can provide the grade and the slope and all that. Bob Generous: Right. They could meet the 3 to 1. Our only concern has been, and it's one of the conditions that we looked at addressing any drainage that would result from that. Councilman Labatt: I'll come back to that point. That's all I have for right now. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Couple things I'd like to go back over, just to make sure from an understanding standpoint. Changes in the design that have occurred since the Planning Commission, just so we are aware if there's something that they saw at the Planning Commission but it's not there now. Can you summarize for us what changes have occurred. II y N City Council Meeting-- August S, 2005 Bob Generous: The primary one is that they've enhanced the landscaping along the north and east property lines. I don't, I just got this plan today so I don't know a count but visually looking at it, it looked at least on the south part that they have a double row of trees instead of the single that was originally shown. Mayor Furlong: You said south part. This is up along? Bob Generous: On Galpin. Mayor Furlong: On Galpin down and then. Bob Generous: Adjacent to Lot 1. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Okay. R.. Bob Generous: And they would blend that in with the existing trees. Also what they don't show is that we're going to try to lower Lot I approximately 5 feet so that we don't have a retaining wall between Lot I and 2. Most likely that retaining wall should go over to the eastern side of the site, but we'll see that as part of any final construction plan. Mayor Furlong: In terms of land use, we have residential neighborhoods to the north, to the east of this site. It's guided for this purpose. First question I have is the property to the south of Lyman directly south of this property, the nursery. Kate Aanenson: Holasek's. Mayor Furlong: Holasek's. What is that guided? Bob Generous: Office industrial. Mayor Furlong: So the same use is being proposed here. Bob Generous: Yes. Mayor Furlong: Okay. And in terms of changes as we think about traffic in the comprehensive plan in this area, what changes have occurred in land use guiding that you're aware of and... Kate Aanenson: Actually the most significant one in this area was the school district. They bought a piece of property that was also guided industrial and the city has received numerous requests over the years to change that to multi family and stood firm on the industrial. In looking at the school needs and trying to possibly make a high school, that was at the time the talk, the District 112 they look at a high school and the City Council agreed for that purpose only, that if it didn't become a school that they would rezone it back to this industrial. But that was the other significant one in this area. IHN City Council Meeting — August 8, 2005 g Mayor Furlong: And refresh my memory when we were looking at, because I think we were dealing with traffic in the AUAR for the 2005 MUSA area and now it's the school site is outside of that but we were looking at school site and an industrial commercial site as one or the other within the 2005. What were the traffic patterns between the two? I mean the fact that that's now a school versus potentially commercial, is that going to be generating more or less traffic... Kate Aanenson: In the AUAR we've looked at, and that would be just for everybody's clarification, that'd be the area south of Lyman. Here's Lyman to Pioneer. Future Powers and Audubon. About 600 acres in there. We actually looked at a 30 acre school in that site and the AUAR, or the traffic study as a part of that environmental assessment actually determined that the school would probably be equivalent to the industrial trips generated. A lot of it has to do with the type of school. If it's high school, that obviously has more trips because more drivers. As opposed to the elementary which has the least amount of trips because most of those kids are bussed. So there's more parents... Mayor Furlong: Okay. So that site could still, I mean obviously the school district owns it. The intention is to build a school. So but the traffic out there is not going to be expected to be significantly different. Kate Aanenson: Than if it would be an industrial park. Mayor Furlong: Had it been industrial which is still possible. Kate Aanenson: Right. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. With the PUD versus the IOP. What is that, has anything been done with regard to architectural standards and for the development? Bob Generous: Well we provided specific standards in there that go up and beyond what the office industrial commercial design standards require. We said no back sides to the building that's visible to the public. Materials can be limited. Again we can work on building types and specified as part of the design standards, zoning of the property. Mayor Furlong: Okay. So the standards within the PUD document this evening are higher standards you're saying than they would be just in the general ordinance? Bob Generous: Correct. Mayor Furlong: Having come through a PUD. Okay. Where else in the city, and I think there was a mention of Chan Business. Where else do we have situations here, I mean there obviously has to transition between any type of land use and another. Where do we have other situations where we have a land use such as this commercial land use next to residential? Bob Generous: Low density off of Dell Road and Lake Drive East where Super Valu and those projects are. And then we have the residential in Eden Prairie. 13 CityCouncil Meeting —August 8, 2005 Kate Aanenson: It also abuts Chanhassen too, so the Super Valu... Then the other one would be Lake Drive West. Mayor Furlong: And where's that located? Kate Aanenson: If you go on Lake Susan Hills, to the south, that industrial park, and that's a newer industrial park. Then we also have the Chan Business Center where the National Weather Service is, that is residential low density to the south. Councilman Lundquist: You have Stone Creek and General Mills as well. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Actually there's another one too, that is Timberwood. Right on the corner of Timberwood. When we put the road in —there across from the elementary school, just. on that corner of Timberwood. Mayor Furlong: Across from the church and elementary school. Kate Aanenson: And there's some multiple housing right there that's adjacent to Stone Creek Drive... Mayor Furlong: Okay. Let's see, other questions right now. Councilman Lundquist: Bob the drainage north of Lot 6 mostly. As I was walking around out, there last week, you know we haven't had a lot of rain. It's pretty sloppy down at the bottom there and as we look at grading and doing berming and all of that stuff there, there's kind of, I forget exactly which house it is in Trotters Ridge but there's sort of a culvert thing there that apparently doesn't work all that well and I guess as we do those berming and those things, has Lori taken a shot at what we think is going to happen to the water there that now uses, kind of pools right where that building on Lot 6 will be. Bob Generous: Lori and our engineers and their engineers and we still want to, the ultimate design will depend on what the final berm is and so we'll have to look where we need to put intermediate catch basins in also to pick up water within the site. The developer's open to that. Whatever he needs to do to treat his water. Councilman Lundquist: So we're looking at it from the standpoint of the water in the bottoms of those yards should get better or remain and definitely not get worst. That's our standpoint? Bob Generous: Yes. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. Do we have that set as a requirement anywhere? Bob Generous: Only in the general that the developer will work with staff to address the drainage issues on the north side of Lot 6. 14 City Council Meeting — August 8, 2005 Councilman Lundquist: Okay. And then the distance between, really between that northeast corner of the building on Lot 5, or the lot on 5 and the north property line. We've got that Outlot B, is that a triangle piece so from the, what have we got from the setback there? Is that 150 feet? Bob Generous: That's over 200 feet. Councilman Lundquist: Over 200 feet, okay. Bob Generous: Primarily because they need to have the wetland setback. Councilman Lundquist: On Lot A. Bob Generous: For Outlot A. Councilman Lundquist: B, I'm sorry. Mayor Furlong: Excuse me councilman. What's that from the wetland? Bob Generous:. It's a 40 foot setback from the buffer and a 16 Vz foot buffer requirement so 56 and a half. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Sorry. Councilman Lundquist: And then, last when we talked about, we talked a little bit about access from Lyman. We talked about also the potential of access to the west through the existing business park in Chaska. Can you talk about those conversations and what came out of that. Bob Generous: We did ask Chaska if they would be opposed to that idea. They said go ahead. However in looking at it, there's two issues in that. First we have private property. The only place theoretically to put it would split the two properties just to the west of this. Lot 5. Councilman Lundquist: 4 and 5? Bob Generous: Yeah, right up in that northwest corner of the site. And if you go to the Chaska side there's a retaining wall in that location also so there's topographic changes that would be tough. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. Is that a public street or a private street that it would access off of. Bob Generous: It would be two driveways. So it would be, it's private driveways. Two of them rather than even a private street that would serve two properties. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. 15 City Council Meeting - August 8 2005 . Mayor Furlong: Any other questions for staff at this time? We may have some others as we do hear more. Okay, at this time the applicant's here. Like to come forward and address the council? Thank you. Ben Merriman: Mr. Mayor, council members. Good evening. My name's Ben Merriman. I represent Eden Trace and the developer of the property. Sometimes it's easier to start from the beginning then kind of walk through things then it is to jump right in so I'd kind of like to do that if I may. I'll try to be relatively brief because some of these subjects have already been covered. We originally looked at the 40 acre site and as Bob mentioned we cache in under an IOP and with that IOP we had one additional lot to what you're seeing now. We complied with everything within the zoning requirements of an IOP and had that lot in there. We met with staff and I really got to extend my gratitude and appreciation to your staff of Chanhassen. The depth of knowledge within the staff is excellent and they pointed out a number of different factors that persuaded us to go into a PUD, and so I think we owe them some gratitude from that standpoint because they've helped us through this process. We have a couple wetlands that we're dealing with. There was one that is in this area here and then a couple of spots that are in here. Those are being mitigated to the wetland area there. We have a regional holding pond. Our preservation area is approximately 4 acres and that's the outlot that we're going to leave as a preservation area, and that's this area here. In designing that we also took into consideration a majority of the trees that extend beyond the 4 acres which is down in this area here. In order to do that what we've done is design the shared drive between these two lots rather than running two driveways, one for each. And in doing so we've been able to save a lot of these trees. We also ran a lot line between these two trees that are here in order to maximize the number of trees and save them. After the planning meeting we did a number of different things to try and appease the neighbors of this development, and I think we've done an excellent job. I'd like to kind of go through those. First of all we increased the number of trees that are being planted on this property and this is just for the development. Each building has to come in and also plant trees and that type of thing, so we're not addressing the buildings. Just the development itself. At this point we have enough trees in the exterior buffer zones to comply with an IOP zoning. In other words if we've gotten the site, we have enough trees planted in the buffer zone to comply with the tree replacement requirements that you currently have. The tree replacement or the number of trees that we increased are in a couple of different areas. First area is right through here. All these trees in here were added and then again through here and then we've increased the area through here dramatically. All this area and from here to here we have trees planted to the maximum number we can get in there. In other words there's only so close you can put each tree and it will still allow growth, so we've maxed out the number of trees that we can plant essentially along the borders of this industrial park. There's been a lot of talk and rightly so about this area in here. Now we first talked about just putting in a large berm and Lori, rightfully so came in and said look, and Till came in and said, look if you plant trees on top of a big berm, a big hill, they're going to die. You can't just do that. So we had to come up with another solution, and what we're suggesting is above and beyond planting all these trees through here, the wall of this building here will act as basically a retaining wall. So what we're going to do is start a slope outside of these trees. When this property develops. I can't do it prior to this building going in but the building wall is going to act as a retaining wall. So what we'll do is run an undulating berm ... ski hill coming up to this and then undulate the hill and roll it a little bit and put in spruce trees are normally the best that we can provide, up towards the building and 16 City Council Meeting — August 8, 2005 then the trees that are planted along the perimeter in the buffer zone, those will be deciduous trees of maples and lindens and that type of thing. What this does, and the, it's a little bit high. I don't know if you can zoom in on this, but what our architect did is put a building, and I'll put my glasses on to read. This is 40 foot. This is a 30 foot high building. So we looked at two lots and then what we did is in the back yard of Lot 2 of Trotters Ridge, if you were standing at the walkout level, and you're 6 foot tall, this is the sight line that you're going to see. Now the architect, we're asking to undulate the hill a little bit differently than what he's got ... bring it up a little bit higher in this area here. Well basically this is the sight line so if you're standing there, at the floor elevation of Lot 2, we're decreasing the amount of visibility of the building quite dramatically by building this hill. We think that will help a lot. The area in there will be maintained in more of a natural state. I think we need a little bit of discussion about this with the neighbors as to what they'd like to see in there, but I think what we're finding is not something that's sodded and mowed once a week, but something more in line of a natural vegetation and perhaps it needs to be cut 5 times a year. 4 times a year. It's probably not too dissimilar from, in the Chanhassen Business Park there is the weather station has a large area and I believe that's cut several times a year, but it's not mowed per se. The drainage has also been something that we've looked at in that area. There is a culvert in there. To be quite honest I don't know the size of that culvert and we'll investigate as to it's size and it's capacity. We will however put in our's a drain for anything that comes off of that hill so any additional drainage that's going to occur, if . that culvert can't take in that water, then we will pipe a drain in there to take care of any excess water, and we'll work with staff and our engineers and their engineers to guarantee that there isn't any additional water that's going into that area. It's my understanding that water does accumulate in that area and then slowly drain off into that drain. There's one other area that we changed a little bit and Bob alluded to it and that is these two lots down here. Currently we have a grade change between this lot and this lot through the center line. What we're proposing to do is lower this building. We're not sure exactly how much to lower but we're trying to lower the building a couple of feel and then we'll change this access point and by doing that these two buildings sit at the same floor elevation. We eliminate that retaining wall. The retaining wall can go here and we're able to save a little bit more trees and be able to get the building lower so when the new trees are planted, it covers more of the building. I think that pretty much covers the changes that we've made. There was also some conversation about the height of buildings and that's an area that we're willing to bend a little bit off the 40 feet and we've worked with the folks and try to find a building height that works for us and it also will work for the neighbors. If you have any questions I'd be happy to answer them. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions of Mr. Merriman. Councilman Lundquist: Mr. Merriman, you might not, maybe this is a question for Kate or Bob. There's a building that you can see from, that would essentially be just to the west of your's on Lot 5 in that Chaska industrial park there. How, do you know, anybody know how high that is about from the back of the houses in Trotters Ridge? Ben Merriman: The bakery or Lewis Engineering? Councilman Lundquist: Either one. The higher of the, when you stand in that back yard you can see, there's a pretty prominent building that sticks up above the fence there. 17 City Council Meeting -- August 8, 2005 Ben Merriman: There's a bakery back there and that has, that's got to be well over 30 feet. And Lewis Engineering isn't quite that tall. I think they're probably, I guess I don't know exactly how tall their building is. Councilman Lundquist: And then there's a grade change between that and what Lot 5 would be at now. Kate Aanenson: Correct. That's why there's a retaining wall on the Chaska side. Councilman Lundquist: Okay, thank you. Mayor Furlong: Other questions? Of Mr. Merriman. Councilman Peterson: Mr. Merriman, one of the, we brought up earlier was a retaining wall going from 6 to 12 and I think Steve, I don't know whether you were talking about that on the north side or not but the impact of moving from 6 to 12 could, I'm assuming that could mean taking out more trees and increasing the angle, considering you would lose the benefit of increasing the berm because you could have less vegetation on the higher berm, would that be safe to assume or not? Ben Merriman: On Lot 1? Councilman Peterson: On the north. Councilman Lundquist: I think he means 6. Councilman Peterson: Yeah. Just the berm. Ben Merriman:- The berm height? Increasing the berm height? Councilman Peterson: Yeah. Anywhere from that northern part where the residents are, Steve is that where you're talking about increasing the berm? Councilman Labatt: Yeah, by Lots 2, 3 and 4 side. Councilman Lundquist: Of Trotters. Ben Merriman: Yeah, I think 3 to I is maintainable so we could certainly run a 3 to l slope from essentially where we're planting the new trees all the way up to the building. Or through that entire 100 foot setback. We could run a 3 to 1. I'd like to see some undulation of that and so that it. looks a little bit more natural than just a runoff slope. And in doing so if you create some pockets, that will collect some of the water for the trees and you plant the trees in the pocket and that seems to work fairly well. As that area wouldn't be irrigated, or at least we weren't planning on irrigating it. 18 City Council Meeting — August 8, 2005 • Todd Gerhardt: And that's what you're proposing right now is a 3 to 1. To go higher you would go above a 3 to 1 slope. Ben Merriman: Well you can go higher. Increase the 3 to 1 angle? Todd Gerhardt: If you made the berm taller, you would lose your 3 to 1 slope, correct? Ben Merriman: Yep. Todd Gerhardt: And then you have kind of a maintenance issue that you're going to have to one, real question if the trees will grow on that steep of a berm and then two, I don't know how you maintain it. It would have to be just natural grasses of some sort that would never be mowed. Ben Merriman: It gets very tough. I mean you could not, essentially after a 3 to 1 slope it gets very difficult to mow. Also in heavy rains you're going to get wash off and even if, it isn't so dramatic during the summertime when the vegetation is fairly strong, but if you get a heavy wash off in the early spring, it will create some wash offs so I wouldn't recommend going higher than a 3 to 1 slope in that area. Unless you were to retain it. Unless you were to come up with a 3 to 1, put a retaining wall and then continue at 3 to 1. That's something you could possibly do but you're getting into some more mechanics of the whole thing. Mayor Furlong: But you were saying, if I understood you by the undulating fact that it was designed, or actually reducing some of the storm water runoff to the north across the area and it catches in the lower levels and move it east/west and also in the trees. Is that? Ben Merriman: There is some. It will catch some of it but not a great deal. What we're trying to do is just create some slope or pocket for where we're planting the trees and then that gives the trees more water and a better change that they'll survive under those conditions. The water runoff I think we just have to plan on. Anything that lands on that berm is going to come back so we'll plan on that and engineering it so ... so be it but we'll plan for all the water that comes, that lands on that berm to be picked up by a storm drain of some sort. And if the capacity of the existing one is not sufficient, then we'll put one in that is. And we'll bring the water to our regional pond. Mayor Furlong: How is that to the west of Lot 6, you get into the Outlot C. How are the elevations there versus the height that you're describing here? Is it going to be, right now where Lot 6 is pretty low. In fact I think there's even a wetland area... C is higher, correct? Councilman Lundquist: Yeah, there's a hump in the middle. Mayor Furlong: Of Lot 6, I'm sorry. Between Lot C and Lot 6. Outlot C. Ben Merriman: Lot C comes up quite dramatically. Yeah, there's a fair amount of a ridge that basically runs through that treed area so it's coming up from the east, hitting that ridge where we have the preserve, and then running again back down to the west. 19 City Council Meeting -At 8, 2005 Mayor Furlong: Now is there going to be an opportunity to improve storm water in the area both on your property as well as maybe this property to the north in terms of managing the storm water here, and maybe that's as much a question for staff too as you, I mean as we're looking at building Lot 6. Collecting the storm water there, is that. an opportunity to the extent that Lot C right now because of it's elevation down to the northeast, that we can try to work with storm water management there as well. Ben Merriman: That's a good point. And perhaps we should take a look at the water that. currently comes off of Outlot C or that preserved area and do that in the water calculations and we'd be happy to do that. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Any other questions for Mr. Merriman or the staff? iK, Councilman Labatt: Can you pop up Nann that overhead? Go back to your little schematic there on the sight line, the cross section. The bottom right there. So this cross section is from a resident, a 6 foot resident sitting, standing outside his walkout level. Of Lot 2 or 3, they're pretty similar. Ben Merriman: I believe they're pretty close, yeah. Councilman Labatt: So if they were in their upper level bedroom or family room, which is 8 to 16 feet above that grade, they have a whole different sight line, correct? Ben Merriman: That is correct. They would be looking from, if they were out there at the main level of their house, it's probably an additional 10 feet higher I would surmise and the architect also didn't run this at a 3 to 1 slope. Councilman Labatt: No. Ben Merriman: And I asked him to but sometimes you have to. Councilman Labatt: Can you take a free hand pen and try drawing a 3 to I slope on there? I'm just trying to figure out, my whole point is, I. don't know if you guys have ever watched or follow my hand here, where it comes down from the building and then swoops back up. That swoop back up is where I'd like to see it a little bit higher and that whole thing would be higher, correct? Ben Merriman: Correct. What he did is he started out as a 3 to 1 slope so again this area here is probably run at a good 3 to 1 slope and so if you were to continue that, and then put some kind of a undulation in here but if this was continued up I think you'd be running a 3 to 1 slope and we're probably at the top of that tree... Councilman Labatt: Once you put that tree up higher, the trees up higher onto the building. Ben Merriman: That is correct. But we would be certainly willing to run it at a 3 to 1 slope with some undulations from the plantings of the new trees to that building. 20 City Council Meeting — August S, 2005 Councilman Labatt: I've got more points but I'll just wait. Councilman Lundquist: That point that Councilman Labatt was talking about, how far is it from those houses, Lot 1, 2, 3 there along Trotters to that edge of that proposed building on Lot 5? Or Lot 6, I'm sorry. You've got a what, 100 foot setback from the property line there and then those houses are probably set back what, 50-60 feet maybe. Something like that so you're 150-160 feet. Mayor Furlong: Any other questions at this time? No? Okay, thank you. Any follow up questions for staff at this point? What I'd like to do at this point then is invite residents and other interested parties to come up for public hearing, public comment. I would say too, as a preference here, we received a tremendous number of e-mails, phone calls, comments on this development and comments about what took place at the Planning Commission. We've also had an opportunity now to review the Planning Commission meeting's verbatim so to the extent that we have comments from the commissioners as well as residents so with that being said, I'd certainly like to present this opportunity for residents to come forward and provide some comments and to the extent that they're new comments or emphasis of other comments, and you'll have to use your judgment. If there's a number of you that want to say the same thing, if you can appoint a representative, that might save us time and by no way going to reduce the emphasis of the point I can assure you. So with that I would invite people to come forward. Provide the council with their comments. Please state your name and address as you do. Barry LaBounty: My name is Barry LaBounty. I have been a Chanhassen resident here for 15 years and currently live at 2421 Bridle Creek Trail. I wish to thank the council members and the mayor for giving me the chance here to speak tonight on the Chanhassen West Business Park development. And just to start out, I'd like to, I like many others support development in our city, for both business and residential. Do not object to this development, the Chanhassen West Business Park. As with any new development there are concerns to what this will do to the quality of life and of course the property values long term. Really all I ask is that the development's completed in a manner that takes into consideration a transition zone between the neighborhoods affected and the development. I would like to ask that you reconsider a few of the recommendations made to the Planning Commission by the surrounding neighbors. Councilman Lundquist: Excuse me Mr. Mayor. Todd, I'm having trouble hearing, thanks. Sorry Mr. LaBounty. Barry LaBounty: Thank you. Item 1, I'd really like to see to hold the buildings 5 and 6 to no more than one story plus the parapet for screening of rooftop equipment. This really would assure that as my neighbors and my family look out our upper story windows, we're not really looking into a great wall basically or if in some cases there are second floor office spaces, we'd actually have people looking straight into our bedroom windows that are working in these office spaces. Really item 2 is assure that the berm is provided between Outlot B and Building 5 and that a berm on the north side of Building 6, which I guess now has an increase in trees, but again is structured enough so that it does provide again some barrier and transition zone between the current development. And really the only way to do this at this point is to increase the buffer 21 City Council Meeting — August 8, 2005 zone. Obviously there's a 3 to 1 and it says we can only have it 6 foot, a 6 foot berm. That 6 foot berm will not really give us a whole lot of screening. Maybe from the ground level it will give us somewhat of a screening but looking out our kitchen windows, looking out our bedroom windows it will be really basically no screening at all. By increasing that to 150 feet, that would allow us to have a larger, taller berm and hopefully provide the transition that we would require. And lastly, item 4, I'd like to at least make sure again that, reiterate what Mr. Merriman had pointed out again or they're looking at the drainage in the southeast corner of Lots really 2, 3 and 4. Having been in that area for 3 years, I've seen a lot of snow melt. A lot of heavy rain where that water tends to build up way out into the farm land. And as everybody knows in the spring snow melts we tend to get some rapid melting with large rain storms and it can create quite a big lake in that area. And actually in one case last year, just about came together with the wetland that was further to the south. So I guess with that, once again I. want to thank the council members and the mayor for the chance to speak tonight. In summary, I do not oppose this development. I only wish to be able to preserve as much as possible the quality of the surrounding area for those of us who live here and also of course the future business owners as well. Thanks. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Peter Sidney: My name is Peter Sidney. My LuAnn and I live at 2431 'Bridle Creek Trail, which is Lot 5 in Trotters Ridge. I want to thank the council and the mayor for giving us a chance to speak this evening, and I'll be brief. First I'd like to say that we appreciate what the property owners, the developer and the staff have done to take into account the concerns of the residential neighbors and mitigate the impact of the proposed development. While we do not oppose the proposed development, we feel that to maintain the livability and quality of life for which we chose Chanhassen, it's essential to balance the needs for further development and provide a satisfactory transition between neighboring residential and industrial areas. We ask that the council seriously consider the concerns and requests of the neighbors that you'll hear, and some specific conditions that.I ask that you adopt would be the following. Designate Outlot C as a permanent conservation easement precluding any future development or change of permitted uses. I think that we have that in the proposal. Restrict the height of buildings 5 and 6. We ask that the buildings not exceed one story plus parapet for screening of roof top equipment. Do not allow outdoor paging and speaker systems. Consider limiting the hours of operation of businesses to two shifts. Do not allow lighted signage. Require minimally invasive lighting on the north sides of buildings 5 and 6, and specifically concerning Lot.5, to protect the large white oak tree. We're the lot line between our property and Outlot C. 'Locate the barrier fencing in Outlot C no closer than 10 feet beyond the drip line of the tree. Jill Sinclair was out to visit our house and put out some proposed staking for the barrier fencing there. And also to protect against disturbance of the roots of this tree, do not extend the west end of the berm along the northeast property line beyond Lot 4 of Trotters Ridge. Again I want to thank the council for giving us a chance to speak tonight and I appreciate it very much. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Kevin DiLorenzo: Hello Mayor Furlong and council members. My name's Kevin DiLorenzo. I live at 2382 Stone Creek Lane West which on this map would put me right about here at the end 22 City Council Meeting — August 8, 2005 of the cul-de-sac. I want to share some of the thoughts that are on my mind.tonight as well as the minds of a lot of my neighbors as we talked about this proposed development the other night. Let me start by saying that we believe that developers have a right to develop their property. But we also happen to believe that this is not the right development plan. We believe we can do better. There needs to be a better transition between the proposed development and the nearby existing neighborhoods, primarily Stone Creek and Trotters Ridge. As you know this industrial development borders these two family neighborhoods which we believe makes this situation unique. All sorts of concerns have already been shared with the Planning Commission. Our first choice would be for the City Council to eject this proposal and take a closer look as to what's going on in our corner of town. We want to see a clear vision for the city's plan. Development has been fast and furious all around us. From Lifetime Fitness to 490 Town and Country Homes on the Degler farm,property, to a new Chanhassen school. and those are just a few of the things we know about. We believe this land being talked about tonight could serve a greater need for the community in the future. Now if you don't agree with that, we would like to see a better proposal in front of you tonight. I'm sure several of my neighbors will share their thoughts about things like providing greater setbacks, building smaller and more attractive buildings, limiting semi truck traffic in and out of the development and perhaps the biggest issue, moving the proposed entrance and exit to Lyman. As citizens most directly affected by this proposed development I don't believe we're asking for anything more than our elected officials are there to deliver and we're looking out for the best interest of the community. I want to thank you guys for the role you play in making Chanhassen such a great place to live. Even CNN and Money Magazine have ranked us number 16 in the country and that's a great feat. Now is not the time to settle. If you agree I'd encourage you to vote against this proposed development tonight. If you're unsure I simply ask that you delay your vote until you've had more time to think about it's impact on our neighborhood and the greater community. Earlier today I mentioned to Mayor Furlong that many of my neighbors believe a decision to approve this development had already been made. He assured me that that's not the case. As you know the Planning Commission had a 3 to 2 split vote on the issue. Tonight the vote is up to you. Thanks for listening. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Jeffrey McGuire: Good evening. My name is Jeffrey McGuire. I reside at 2272 Stone Creek Lane East. I'm Vice President of the Stone Creek Homeowners Association. Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight Mr. Mayor, council members. The Planning Commission has worked hard to try to meet the needs of our community as well as the property owners in developing this site. We do however respectfully dissent with the zoning ordinance adverse affects ... from the submission which is the traffic generation by the proposed use within the capabilities serving the project. We're particularly disappointed that this plan does not take into account the existing road that accesses Lyman Boulevard. We're concerned with the traffic generation study, particularly in light of the zoning of the property to the south of Lyman and how that will impact traffic flow onto Lyman. Perhaps sooner or later another crossroad where the existing one is. In addition the District 112 property to be developed within the next few years. The Highway 212 extension which as we know drops off onto Lyman east of the subject property and of course the Town and Country development. We would respectfully submit that Buildings 6, 8 and 7 be limited in their height. Or that any pasture of fill in -would be equalized by an increase in the height of the berm on the east side of that property. With respect to ►. c City Council Meeting — August 8, 2005 Building 1 we would also like that limited to one story. But our biggest concern is the amount and the flow of traffic. The trip generation study that compares the Chanhassen Business Park is a business park with multiple access points. This property with only one cul-de-sac will force the traffic out through one exit and entrance for the same quantity of trip generations per day. What that means for any truck traffic of course is that there's only certain left turn lanes. No left turn lane exists right now northbound on Galpin into that property. A right turn lane exists sorthbound on Galpin into that property. Trucks coming in on Lyman Boulevard headed eastbound will be forced to make a left turn across traffic with no light or any stop signs. Traffic westbound on Lyman will be turning north onto Galpin and be forced to make a left turn across traffic with no left turn lane. As you may know, this is a heavily traveled school bus route with pick-up's along Galpin Boulevard. In fact the buses sometimes park to the right hand side, the east side of Galpin as they hold up for their route. So we would want you to take that -into account. We'd also note that while we're grateful for the Outlot C. dedication to preserve the many beautiful trees on that site, we do note that there was a parking dedication waiver providing cash for the city and we would hope that some of that cash would be applied for additional mitigation along the east side for berming and trees. Perhaps even re -sizing some of those mature trees onto that berm. Thank you very much. .Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Anyone else? Thor Smith: Good evening. Thanks for allowing us to speak. My name is Thor Smith. I live at 2139 Boulder Road in the Stone Creek development and I'm also newly on the Stone Creek Association Board. And we represent about 100, well exactly 141 homes and more than 265 people in our neighborhood. I've not spoken with all the households but I've been in contact with a large quantity of them and because of various reasons many of them can't be here tonight and the ones that I spoke with wanted to have some of the voice heard before you. The number one comment that was raised by everyone that I spoke with is that this just plain does not make sense. When pressed a little bit deeply their reply is very consistent that why would anyone put industrial right across from or right next to residential neighborhoods. And you know we as a group, and again I certainly don't speak for everyone in our neighborhood. I don't want to imply that, but we feel the proposal, this proposal was not given proper consideration. We feel there needs to be much more consideration for the myriad of other developments that are coming up or have recently come in such as the Degler farm, the new school coming in, the townhomes, Lifetime Fitness. Just the addition of Lifetime Fitness has had a significant increase of the traffic on Galpin Boulevard and by adding the proposed development we feel the traffic gets raised to you know unacceptable levels and you have even a larger dilemma on our hands. Another common concern is the lack of vision for the future of Chanhassen. I know 'I personally, and a lot of people I've talked to take great pride in the fact that you know we live in the 16"' best city in the country and you know we brag about that and however we feel that by approving an industrial business park directly adjacent to a residential neighborhood with virtually no transition between the two shows a lack of planning and we feel that 16Ih ranking in the future may be very difficult. And it you know saddens us because we know the potential's there. We're not asking for any special consideration. We're not asking for anything different. We're asking for the same consideration that we feel's been given to other projects in the downtown areas of Chanhassen and we just don't feel that we've been given ... certain circumstances. Most of the people in our neighborhood anyway believe that this land should be developed and we 24 City Council Meeting — August 8, 2005 want to see an increase in business locating here and, but we would like to see development have a transition from our neighborhood where we raise our family to the industrial. The staff report states that the developer's going to use high quality materials and you know, we respect that and we'd also, we would ask that the definition of it be more spelled out. You know it's really relative to what you're doing I guess that high quality materials for someone is completely different than it is to somebody else and we think that that needs to be spelled out a lot more clearly. We think that there should be some other restrictions as mentioned by some other people. We think that there needs to be more traditional roof lining or some type of a facade on the buildings facing the traffic that will be and the homeowners that look out their windows at these buildings that are going to... By doing these types of things you're going to blend the developments much better than the proposed for the site. And we just ask if you agree with these concerns that we would ask or would encourage you to exercise the -option of deferring the approval of this for a period of time and allowing us to have more conversations or a conversation with the developer in making more of a smooth transition between the residential and the industrial area. If you're unsure then we would ask that you would delay a vote until you have at least some more up to date study and on the direct impact of this and other upcoming developments. Thank you. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Gene Kruchoski: Good evening. My name is Gene Kruchoski. I live in Stone Creek as well as many of the rest of the people here. Mayor Furlong: And your address sir. Gene Kruchoski: 2030 Boulder Road. Mayor Furlong: Thank you sir. Gene Kruchoski: Sure. Many points have already been brought up. The things that I'd just like to mention in addition to those that I've heard is, I hope that there's been some time spent by the council looking at the traffic as patrols try to cross children across Galpin at this time. There would be nothing in your studies as you said comparing car traffic versus truck traffic. You stated like what will be going into the high school. Well we know they don't take semi's. They take nicer cars than a lot of us. Anyway, but you want to, you have to make comparisons apples to apples, not apples to oranges. The development you're proposing to accept would bring in truck traffic. The truck traffic near the school is already at a scary level, and I think it needs to be considered and the safety of our children. The second thing I'm noticing the plat map for the development as it is. I would like to know is any of the presentations you've had initially are there any plat maps showing that development drawn out with access from Lyman or access from the west and if you've seen those, were they presented to the County and rejected or is this just a more comfortable way to get through this situation? Thank you. Amina Linkous: Hi Mr. Mayor and councilmen I'm Amina Linkous. I'm at 2208 Boulder Road. I spoke with many of you and I thank you for your prompt responses in speaking with us and allowing us to speak tonight. I just have two main concerns. One is the trees along Galpin 25 City Council Meeting — August 8, 2005 t Boulevard, we talked about one of the things that you did which is nice is added more trees onto Galpin Boulevard. Are these going to be large trees or seedlings or how long can we ... so that'd be one question. Kate Aanenson: Do you want me to answer that now. There's a lot of other questions we may be answering too. Mayor Furlong: We'll get back to it then. Kate Aanenson: We'll write them all down. Amina Linkous: And then the other concern I had, and I talked to the County Engineer today, is on the access versus Galpin and Lyman and we talked about that. The one thing that was addressed to that and I drove the property prior to coming to this meeting, is the access over here on this side is the other business park because I was surprised and happy to hear that Chaska was okay with allowing something like that. And I think that there's been so much discussion and so much concern between Trotters Ridge and Stone Creek on this Galpin access and allowing that, I would love to maybe ... the issue on an access in another business park. Because it is an industrial park in our back yard so we're just trying to keep our neighborhood nice and keep it safe for our kids. Thanks for your time. Have a good night. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Drew Dingman: Good evening. My name is Drew Dingman. I live at 2403 Bridle Creek Trail which is Lot 1 in Trotters Ridge and you indicated previously that you had the opportunity to read the minutes from the Planning Commission so I just want to make one point of emphasis and I'll be brief. And that is the point I raised in that the buildings down here were very specifically designed to minimize visibility from up hill angles. There's a lot of care given to those buildings and the concern that my neighbors have as well as folks over in Stone Creek have raised and that building 6 does not seem to bear that same sort of architectural foresight and thoughtfulness. It's two very large lines. It's a very large building and it's the one closest to the residents. I would ask that the council consider.re-designing that building or limiting the size of that as well as the height. Thank you. Mike Wright: Hi there. Thank you very much for listening to us tonight. My name is Mike Wright at 2280_Boulder Road. My biggest concern is the, I'm assuming at some point either there's going to be stop signs or stop light at this intersection. In addition Lyman is getting to the point where trucks coming in and out are having a hard time seeing the stop sign. Or else they're just blowing right: through that intersection so you're ending up going to have a stop light system there also at some point. Galpin is only a mile long, plus we've got the concern as they said going to Bluff Creek. With the townhomes. How many stop signs and stop lights are there going to be in that area? So that's something to consider also. Thanks very much. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Anybody else? 26 0 . City Council Meeting — August 8, 2005 Rodney Melton: Hi. I'm Rodney Melton, 2413 Bridle Creek Trail. Resident of Chanhassen for 10 years and I was just looking for a point of clarification as it relates to the July 19a' Planning Commission meeting. They had mentioned as one of the conditions, I believe it was 54 concerning 150 foot setback as it relates to the Trotters Ridge residences, and tonight I think I heard the discussion centered around 100 feet and if we could clarify that I'd really appreciate it. Joel Lehrke: Good evening. My name is Joel Lehrke. I live at 2329 Boulder Road. That would be the houses that are directly across from Building 1. We're on the drainage pond, in that area. When we had been talking with staff and also with Eden Trace, we've asked for an increased setback in that area. Picture may have been forwarded to you from Planning Commission but there is a set of mature trees in that area that has done a very good job of buffering. I see you nodding your heads and know what I'm referring to. Unfortunately the setback would be about 150 feet. We understand that but anything that would increase it would save a lot of the trees. The other thing I'd like to bring up this evening was the reference. We kind of smiled as you guys went through everything, a lot of this development talked about the codes and how it could be the IOP and basically I want you to know that even though we don't see it as a threat, one that's brought to us as the city at our meetings, the first thing that was said, are they threatening us so just something to consider when you guys mentioned the IOP to us. That is some of the conversation that we've had at our meetings and we said, well they could go to an IOP. Just something for you guys to know that that has been talked about at our meetings. Also with, in regards to the way we've had the housing go next to industrial. The weather ball was brought up. I was going to go take a picture of it today but didn't think we need to do the P.T. Barnum show, but if you really go look at that area at that weather ball, what's very nice about that residential area that's directly to the south of that area, it has a very distinct long, mature tree growth. Mature trees. Not the type that are going to be replaced with the 5 gallon balls or the 2 '/z inch diameter trees so that's something to keep in mind that you guys did with your blending there, that you do have a residential abutting up to an industrial. You have 40 foot mature trees along that whole area and it's a solid line. Well done city. Well done. And that's what we're looking for at our area. Is something like that to do it. Now we've talked this evening about facades a little bit and some of the people have brought up points what we mean by facades on the east side of Galpin and also perhaps, depending on what you do with berming or facades for those people on Trotters Ridge. There's been examples of a McDonald's in Illinois that one of our residents used to live by. That when they looked at it you didn't even know it was a McDonald's. That type of facade is what we're talking about. We're talking about a person's home here about a Super Target north of Milwaukee and that's as big as anything around here and he said when you drove by it, you would never have known it was a Super Target. It just looked Iike nice little office buildings. Example I've seen in Chanhassen is where Quiznos, the dentist, across from the gas station where the new medical clinic went in. That has a very nice change in a fagade for what is really a neighbor brought up to my attention a very square building that is broken up very nicely. Now I've talked with Mark and we know he says he has his undulations and breaking of the building and windows and stuff like that, but we are asking for a little bit more since this does abut up to so many residentials without a good tree barrier anymore because much of it's going to be taken out and replaced with the small saplings. Yes, in 20 years it will look great. Unfortunately I will be retired at that time and down sizing. Thank you. 27 CityCouncil Meeting -- August S 2005 g g , Mayor Furlong: Anybody else? Abby Wilson: Abby Wilson at 2332 Stone Creek Drive. Thanks for hearing us tonight. Like my neighbors I have some of the same concerns but am also wondering what would the construction time line be. When would it begin and how long would it last? Also would Galpin increase to 4 lanes to allow for the increase in traffic. And what kind of signal or stop sign would be put in that area. I'd also like to see some kind of study of some area that is similar to our's but has had a proposal like this and what that's done to property value and what we can see with our taxes. Thank you. Craig Johnson: Craig Johnson, 2450 Bridle Creek Trail. Two questions, can the developer or the staff demonstrate another neighborhood in Chanhassen that would be burden by4wo sides by light industrial properties? And the second concern I would have is, is the transitions Yes they're putting berms and barriers in but in other industrial areas they've typically done a better transition and a much larger transition than what they're proposing to do here, and if the council is to approve this particular project here tonight, would they be willing to consider some sort of limitation for truck access onto Galpin considering the amount of schools that are going to be put in place for the coming years. Thank you. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Anybody else? What we'll do now at this point is probably close public comment unless somebody else would like to speak, and just for, to explain the process now. We'll bring it back to council. We're going to follow up with a number of answer to some of these questions and then the council will start discussing the motion. As many of you are aware, the 5 of us up here haven't seen this before. Haven't discussed it amongst ourselves so many of you have probably discussed it more than we have at this point, but that's fine because our discussion takes place in the open, so once we bring it back. to council there won't be opportunity. We're not going to go back and forth and continue to respond to questions and stuff so again, if anybody would like to add anything to the record or let the council know of anything, this would be the time because after this we'll discuss it mostly with staff, but I should say mostly amongst ourselves but also with staff and the developer as well. So at this time if anybody else would like to speak,.I'd invite them to come forward now. Joel Lehrke: Mayor, I just have a quick question. ...I was not present' at the meeting of the Planning Commission, I did watch the video tape and what many of noticed... Mayor Furlong: Excuse me sir, could you come back up to the microphone please so that those at home. Joel Lehrke: We just want to exercise some caution here. What we did notice, and I was not able to attend the Planning Commission meeting but I did get the DV, thank you Bob for getting that for me and got a chance to go over it in quite detail and what we've noticed is when the meeting went closed, there were some errors made by the Planning Commission with statements and at that time that gave us no reason to help clarify those points and left us quite hanging. While you can close the meeting, I understand parliamentary procedure, how it works. We're very fearful if you have some sort of instance where it's an incorrect information and we all know some other information, how are we going to get that to you? 0 • City Council Meeting — August 8, 2005 Mayor Furlong: Well, and sir to that point. We're not closing the meeting. Everybody's invited to stay. What I'm trying to emphasis is that we're not going to go on for the next 5 hours back and forth... Joel Lehrke: Right, we understand that but if you see us all kind of rumbling about something that we know that's incorrect, maybe pay attention to the waves that are being made. Mayor Furlong: And we do that each and every meeting. So at this point if nobody else would like to come forward, then I would sincerely thank everybody for their comments this evening as well as the e-mails, phone calls and participation in the Planning Commission as well. Some people have said, to me they felt left out and helpless and those words are kind of disturbing to me because I think we try to make a very good point. I know our Planning Commission does and our council does too to try to listen to people and while we may not always agree, we do listen so with that what I'd like to do now is, we've got a number of issues that have been brought up that I've heard I know staff has. Why don't we, and I know a lot of us have been taking notes and so why don't, Ms. Aanenson, do you want to start with your list and we'll make sure we cover it. Kate Aanenson: Yeah ... Bob Generous and City Engineer Paul Oehme but I'd like to start off and I'm going to take the hot one first as far as the IOP threat because I made that comment. Just so everybody knows, there is a legal process that if it's consistent with the city's comprehensive plan, we are, we're required to approve it. Now the staff worked diligently to try to move off the minimum and move them to the maximum, so herein lies the rub. Now I'll also say that we're going to agree to disagree on some things. Our perspectives but we moved, if you try to get an IOP, which we believe saves. Councilman Lundquist: It's a PUD. Kate Aanenson: A PUD, excuse me. Instead of the straight zoning, because we believe that we would be able to, working with the developer, resolve some of those rough points and clearly there's still some points of conflict that I'll take a minute to go through. First of all I want to clarify Chan Business Center, which I worked on, is a long cul-de-sac. All traffic has to come out onto Audubon Road. So the trip generations that City Engineer Paul Oehme gave would be similar to this. It is a long dead end cul-de-sac. The fagade on Villages on the Pond, that's a commercial development. Both Bob and I worked on that. The first vertical proposed... that was done in the Twin Cities area and that is the, probably the key element that went into there first was St. Hubert's that set the pace, but that is commercial uses in there which typically we tend to get more brick and stucco. We don't have any brick industrial buildings that I'm aware of that are all brick in the city. If you go back on the historical, a lot of them were the tilt up panels which we've really moved a long way from as far as our industrial standards. That was one of the first things that we changed in the city code and I would say Chanhassen Business Center, and I also want to comment on the size of the trees because that was one of the first industrial parks I worked on. They didn't start off that big. That's a lot of years growth on those trees too, and that, there was a fence put on. That fence continually goes down. It's down right now. There's 4 sections of it, it's kind of been a long term maintenance problem on that, so that's kind 29 City Council Meeting — August S, 2005 K. of what we've learned from some of our mistakes on that, putting up fences is a long term maintenance and I think that's some of our concern that we're working with the developer on. When we get a berm too high and it dries out and the trees fall over. We want to make it successful so, and we're still trying to find that right point that it's high enough to create screening and provide adequate to buffering. So again working on both those projects and the setback. would be similar on both those projects between Chan Business Center and the subdivision to the south, as it would be on both of these projects here too. And there are other subdivisions in the city that have commercial. Lake Susan has it across the street and to the north so it'd be on the east side and on the north side, so there are other situations. Again I'll just talk a little bit about the comprehensive plan. We talked about Lifetime Fitness. That's an industrial park. A large industrial park. Couple hundred acres. Was required to do an environmental assessment so all those pieces that fall into that are generated by this:, -The property to the south that we're talking about, the 600 acres is also guided by an environmental assessment document that also analyzed. all the traffic. The area we're talking about:was guided in 1991. We re -visited it when we updated the comp plan. The city did contemplate, we had a request to change the zoning on this particular piece of property and the neighborhood resisted so we left it industrial. As we stated there's industrial to the south and across the street, except for the school wanting to buy and this council stood firm and said if the school was not to build, you wanted to see it left industrial. So there is that industrial in the area....signage issue is something we should discuss. That could certainly be some blight if we have the signs, lit signs along the Galpin Boulevard facing the neighborhood. Depending on the height I think that's something we do need to discuss with the developer so I can certainly see that being a negative issue and we should kind of further evolve that. That would certainly be, and certainly lighting. Any lighting on the north side of, facing Galpin again, looking at that so that's not intrusive. Some kinds of industrial buildings, put wall plaques on and again those can be very intrusive. We do have an area, the one that's adjacent to Eden Prairie. We did have some issues there when a builder changed out some of the wall plaques and we got compliance on that and we don't. have complaints up there on lighting so I think that something we can certainly look at. I'll let Paul answer the question, City Engineer on Galpin widening. There may be potential stop lights or stop controls in that area. Paul Oehme: The County currently does not have any plans for widening Galpin Boulevard. I believe Galpin Boulevard currently is 52 feet wide and there is somewhat of a shoulder on the side of the roadway at this time. You know with the traffic counts that they are at currently, I would be real hesitant to say that the County would ever, or projected traffic counts, would ever extend that roadway to 4 lane design now. Lyman Boulevard is a different story. I mean the traffic counts on that roadway are anticipated to increase significantly over time so with our conversation with the County we are definitely looking at expanding that roadway to 3, maybe 4 lanes of design. Kate Aanenson: We do know there will be a signal at Lyman and Audubon. Further to the south, I mean by the new AUAR area. 'Ultimately. PaulOehme: Right. 30 ! ! City Council Meeting — August S, 2005 Kate Aanenson: And that's a little further south than that so I'm just saying there will be a break in the traffic. Todd Gerhardt: There's one there now. Kate Aanenson: Pardon me? Todd Gerhardt: There's one there now. Kate Aanenson: Oh I'm sorry. Paul Oehme: There will be improvements to that intersection in the upgrades of that signal and again we do anticipate that Galpin and Lyman would have a signal in the near future as well. So another question I think that one of the residents had raised was the turn lanes onto and out of, acceleration lanes out of the proposed development. The county still has not reviewed the final construction plans so they would have that opportunity to include that in the construction plans at that time. So, and again Galpin is the County's jurisdiction. Kate Aanenson: I just wanted to mention too, back to the intersection at Lyman. One of the things that the Park and Rec. Director is working on is that to get to that school site they would do an underpass underneath Lyman with the reconstruction of that, so that would get children to the south of Lyman, underneath Lyman Boulevard, in this new area we're talking about to the school on that side of the street. So it's not at grade. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Kate Aanenson: Then there was another question that we didn't answer and that was about tree size that was going in... Bob Generous: Ordinance requires a minimum planting of 2 1/x inches. It's caliper inches. It's about a 15 foot tall tree. Evergreens are required to average 7 feet. I'm sure they're going to look at trying to preserve some, use some of the trees on site to, as a savings cost because it's just more economical that way. Kate Aanenson: There was a construction time line too and I think Ben has to answer that one. Mayor Furlong: Any, I'm going to look through my list. Any other questions right now for clarification from staff because I think I have a couple for Mr. Merriman too. Councilman Lundquist: On the issue of the road, there was a question asked about, how far along, what level of detail did the County see this development in it's proposed, or if any proposed access off of Lyman? Was it a, when the developer, Mr. Merriman when you went in, was it a I want to put the road off of Lyman and Roger said don't do it. You have to put it on Galpin or did you have some preliminary drawings or layouts. 31 City Council Meeting — August 8> 2005 Ben Merriman: We initially sat down with our engineer, with Schoell and Madsen and we took over the property in trying to design the basic parts of the property. So when you do that, the first thing you look at is access and how to try and lay it out as best we could and we did actually look at it both ways. We looked at coming in right along the regional holding pond for the road which would have been accessed off of Lyman, and then we looked at the access point where we currently have the development. Both were considered but we kind of knew right away, given what was going to happen to Lyman. Lyman's going to become a 4 lane road in the future and we, I'm not new at this. I've been doing this for a long time. They don't want a lot of uncontrolled access points onto 4 lane roads so we kind of had a pretty good idea of what was going to happen, but when we contacted the County, that's when the road was moved over to Galpin. Councilman Lundquist: So you actually showed a design to the County staff at all onwas that a verbal conversation? A` Ben Merriman: No, just a verbal conversation. We did some initial sketches from Schoell and Madsen did some initial sketches showing both ways and how to run a cul-de-sac. We initially had the cul-de-sac in a little different configurations. Went through a couple different configurations with the ,cul-de-sac. Most of those were with regard to saving trees though so we backed it up to keep it away from the high point of that bluff. And then we had a couple configurations of coming off, one coming off Lyman and one coming off Galpin. Councilman Lundquist: Okay, thank you. Councilwoman Tjornhom: And then Paul, you reconfirmed that with MnDot also, correct? Paul Oehme: With the County, correct. Councilwoman Tjornhom: County, yes I'm sorry. County. Mayor Furlong: Before you go Ben. Councilman Peterson: ...for construction. Ben Merriman: Well it's a bit hard to judge. It's based on the economy. We do have one building that we'd like to move forward with and that would be, that would be this building here. We're looking at constructing that building relatively soon. And then other buildings, we're currently looking at trying to, a proposal for this building with a couple of tenants. It'd be a 2 or 3 tenant building. Under a fast pace, 3 years. 5 years might be more close. We developed a park that you folks are aware of on City West. Parkway, or not City West Parkway. On Lake Drive West and that development was about a 60 acre parcel and we thought it would probably take us about 6 years and it we actually finished it in about 4. That was under a good economy and the economy is stable but, so 3 to 5 years. 32 0 0 City Council Meeting -- August 8, 2005 Councilwoman Tjornhom: And this is a related question for you but, 3 to 5 years then, does that mean you would not do any of the berming or any of the tree planting until the project was completed? Ben Merriman: All of the trees, all of the trees that are planted in the buffer area along the edge will be planted. The only consideration that we're, and one of the topics that we're discussing is Building 5 and that berm which is here. We can't build this berm until that wall is in place. And a couple of people have pointed out that this building doesn't look as good as this building. It does. We haven't done anything to this back side intentionally to a degree. We're trying to make it a straight wall. We could put some wiggles in it or something to that effect but if you leave it as a wall and we berm up to it, it's going to look a lot better than if we try to put parking on that side or put office. Design it for office on that side. Currently it's designed to have the office on the east and south side of the building versus the north. You don't really want office on that side of the building. Mayor Furlong: Questions for Mr. Merriman. Councilwoman Tjornhom: I'm sorry, I have one more. Mayor Furlong: Go ahead. Okay. Councilwoman Tjornhom: They were discussing the setbacks and in the Planning Commission it was 100 feet I believe and then, 150 and in our packet it's 100 feet. Show me or can you maybe can't, show me what trees would be lost by doing that. Was it on a point that if you moved the setback line, something would have to give? Ben Merriman: Yes. Basically if you move the setback line, it really has no effect except for this building here. This building, if you drop it 50 feet, you're taking 50 feet of building out of that land. And if we do that then basically I've got to move that building this way to pick up that lost square footage. The problem with that is, and maybe it's a give and take and that would be fine with me. However if we moved the building in this direction, what happens is this is a fairly steep slope with a lot of trees on it, so if I come in, just as an example, if I go 20 feet into that preserved area, you're going to lose 50 feet of trees. Because you get into the root systems and the drop area of a tree, you will kill the tree. Not maybe not right away but it will die most likely within a few years. So it's difficult for me to do an exchange there. In other words if I take 50 feet off one, I've got to take 50 feet that way and it doesn't really work. Or it doesn't work very well. Mayor Furlong: And continuing on that with regard to, you know if you come in the 50 feet as was requested from the north, you're going to be going to the west so you're losing trees. Opportunity in terms of listening to people and trying to look for opportunities with regard to Lots 1 and 2. By dropping Lot 1 down to a similar elevation to Lot 2, so you lose that retaining wall. I think that was something that we're looking at. Do we need as much space between those two buildings so that, because trucks will be driving at the same level rather than at different levels, and is there an opportunity and what do we gain by this in terms of moving those buildings a little closer together? Do we pick up any trees? Any significant trees on the east side 33 City Council Meeting — August S, 2005 �. of Lot I by moving those buildings together now that we're coming to an equal level. Understand my. Ben Merriman: I do understand what you're saying. Mayor Furlong: And maybe you don't have a question but I. guess I'd be interested in, if there's an opportunity there with regards to what's been presented this evening and requested. Ben Merriman: I think perhaps what can happen if the retaining wall is moved from here into this area, what that's going to allow is that area becomes higher. The trees are planted at a higher elevation so we don't necessarily move the parking lot in, but that area becomes higher. Planting trees there, we're probably gaining an additional, Bob do you have the retaining wall, . how high that retaining wall is approximately? There's a 5 foot difference between .Building 1 and 2. If we moved Building 1, which is the closest building down 5 feet, the retaining wall comes up 5 feet. This area here basically we get a rise in area 5 feet. With that we're adding trees at the normal planted height. We're gaining 5 feet of screening. So by moving the retaining wall you're basically gaining screening. Todd Gerhardt: May I try? If you lose your retaining wall inbetween the two buildings, your loading dock area, could that be reduced, thus pulling the building west because you don't have that retaining wall. You have to take into account a factor for those trucks to back up to the loading dock area to stay away from that retaining wall. How much do you gain, you know 10- 15 feet by pulling that building to the east? Or west. See what I mean? Ben Merriman: Yes I do. Theoretically the trucks on those buildings would have to drive around the building. If they're going to back into these ramps here, they essentially cannot do it in this radius here so what they're going to end up doing is driving around the building. Coming back this way and backing into those loading docks. Mayor Furlong: What's your current flow? Ben Merriman: That's the current flow. Mayor Furlong: The current flow, they're corning around both buildings. Ben Merriman: Around the buildings and back in. Same thing here. We're going to make them come around the building and come around this way. Come up and pull in here. Now they pull off the road and pull in this way. Generally they don't like doing that. Truck drivers don't. If this wall's eliminated, this area can get a circle so they can come directly in off this way and circle and come in ... but I don't know how much without having an engineer take a look at it. Todd Gerhardt: This is the mayor's idea... I don't want to take your idea sir. Mayor Furlong: Unless it's a good one, right? Todd Gerhardt: Right. It was a good one. 34 City Council Meeting — August S, 2005 Mayor Furlong: And maybe that's something to look at, is what's the advantage and getting trucks. Now they'll still be at a lower level if we move that retaining wall to the east side of 101, or Lot 1 so. Ben Merriman: I'd be willing to take a look at it and see what happens there and whether we can move it. Mayor Furlong: Both in terms of flow within the development. Keeping it more internal as opposed to ex, into the outside external and then if there is any connect in that retaining wall on the east side of Building 1. Be moved any further west, and what does that gain us in terms of preserving the trees that are there now and... Ben Merriman: The green trees that are highlighted there are actually the ones that are existing and stay. Mayor Furlong: The dark green are? Ben Merriman; The dark green are. There is a really large tree right here, and then up here so if we move that over, I don't know if you're really going to gain any existing trees or save any existing trees. Again the theoretically that area comes higher, we plant new trees. Mayor Furlong: Relative to the roof line of Building 1, it becomes higher because you've dropped the building 5 feet. Ben Merriman: That's correct. Mayor Furlong: Alright. Todd Gerhardt: Still a good idea. Mayor Furlong: There was a question on access points and Roger, maybe this is a question for you. Specifically the question was, having the development be required to access through the Chaska Business Park to the west. I guess my question is, the private property over there as opposed to a public right-of-way, is that a reasonable request when there are two county roads on two sides of it? Tell me what can be done there. Roger Knutson: You can't force the folks who own the private property to allow another private developer to go through their property, is the short answer. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Councilman Lundquist: And we're required to provide access to this parcel in one way or another. Roger Knutson: Definitely. 35 City. 0 Council Meeting— August. 8,2005 Mayor Furlong: In terms of traffic control, Mr. Oehme along Galpin there was a question raised and I think I understood the question as to whether or not there might be a four way stop at the point where Stone Creek and this development would enter if the access is off of Galpin. Is that anticipated given the traffic counts out of this development as well as out of Stone Creek that there'd be a four way stop there? Paul Oehme: Sure. Just based on preliminary numbers that we have here tonight, I would not anticipate needing a four way stop at that intersection. Again a signal or a stop sign warrant would still have to be met based upon significant back-up's or accident issues at that intersection and so there's a lot of different... that we would take a look at, but just based upon the information that we have here tonight, I would not anticipate a signal nor a stop sign': Four way stop sign being included at that intersection. Mayor Furlong: Okay. The architecture standards that are included in the current, or in the staff's report. One of the questions earlier before public comment was, how does that relate to normal —there's also, a resident raised the issue of being more specific in terms of what's required. Is that, thoughts of comments there. Kate Aanenson: Well we have, we have the materials called out. on page S of the staff report.. Materials. Mayor Furlong: How did these compare to other? You said it's different than, there are some industrial properties that have tip up I think you used. Kate Aanenson: yeah, or just concrete block. Yeah, if you look at unadorned tip up, that would probably be General Mills which is just a smooth face, tip up. That type we don't allow anymore. That's one of the older ones we had in the city. Most of these now would be the textured block. Enhanced with glazed tile. Those sort of things, and there's a requirement for additional accent materials which in the past we haven't gotten, so we don't just see a long unadorned fagade, and again we're looking at a representation to show what the ultimate build out. Each of these projects will come in under these standards that are laid out in the staff report and again a public hearing will be addressed on each of those to look at the overall design, orientation and parking, new landscaping, those sort of things. Mayor Furlong: So you're saying, if I heard you right, the accent materials, that's number 11 there on page 9 of 9 or help me out. You said we don't, we haven't gotten that historically? Kate Aanenson: We do. We didn't used to have that but now, with these that's something we require that there's additional architectural materials. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Kate Aanenson: So it's not just one long unadorned wall. That there's relief in that and that's done through the materials. And then the pitched roof with the parapet walls to hide the screening, those sort of things. at 0 • City Council Meeting — August 8, 2005 Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. Thank you. Other questions for staff. Councilman Lundquist: There was talk about the conservation easement on Outlot A. C, I'm sorry. Is that a permanent? Kate Aanenson: I think that's certainly something we can put in there. I would agree, the goal is that's not built on. You don't want in 5 years from now, 5 years from now someone to come in and put a lot on there. The intent is that it be preserved in perpetuity so I think that's something we would certainly want to put in there. Mayor Furlong: Is it going to be dedicated? Kate Aanenson: Well I think that's always the cleanest way is that it be dedicated. Mayor Furlong: Would that be acceptable? Ben Merriman: Very acceptable. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Kate, is there any examples of limiting truck traffic in our town right now? Kate Aanenson: Not to my knowledge. Councilman Peterson: What about the issue of outdoor speakers? I know we have some of that around town as I recall. Kate Aanenson: I agree. I think that's something we should put in here. No outdoor speakers. We don't allow outdoor storage. If that becomes a problem, that's something we follow up on but there is no integral to the design standards, that's not permitted, but certainly no outdoor speakers. I think that's something we can add. Councilman Peterson: I don't think we have limited second shift. That night be a bit over... Kate Aanenson: Even Chan Business Center has, as the City Manager indicated, the postal service has round the clock deliveries out there, as does General Mills, as does the lumber yard. So we have a few. Councilman Peterson: It's not very often used but. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: Any other questions at this point? None? Okay, Mr. Merriman thank you. 37 City Council Meeting _ August 8, 2005: Ben Merriman: Thank you. Mayor Furlong: Alright, I guess at this point we'll bring it to the council and let's start discussing some of these issues and overall the proposed plan. Anybody want to take a start at it and as we get down to some of the issues we may see how our discussion goes. Councilman Labatt: Mayor, not that I want to go first. I want to ask Paul a question. Councilman Peterson: That means you have to go first. Mayor Furlong: Then I guess you have to go first. Go ahead. Councilman Labatt: Paul. I'm still, on this GalpinlLyman access. What's the long range plan for Lyman? We just had a discussion about the 2005 MUSA and obviously Lyman is slated sometime to be upgraded, right? Paul Oehme: Lyman is going to be upgraded from 101 to Powers Boulevard under the 212 project, so that section will be built by 2007. And that corridor is anticipated to be built all the way out to 41. So, and City Manager Todd Gerhardt and I and some other staff members are continuing talking to the school district and. the County about scheduling that upgrade of Lyman Boulevard. There's nothing on our plan right now for that upgrade but we are trying to facilitate that, those discussions and move that process along. Kate Aanenson: Mr. Mayor, can you ask Mr. Oehme maybe to explain what that cross section would look like. That widening. Mayor Furlong: I'd be happy to ask him what the cross section would look like. Mr. Oehme, what would the cross section look like? Paul Oehme: Thanks for the question. Mayor Furlong: Certainly. Paul Oehme: Well, I wish I had that exhibit in front of me but yeah, I wish. No. The cross section for 101, or for Lyman from 101 to Powers Boulevard. I believe it's a 120 foot right-of- way section. That section of roadway is anticipated to be 3 lane at this time with a center turn lane. Upgradeable to 4 lanes in the future. And we are anticipating that that section of roadway to be extended all the way to 41. That does not mean that maybe from Audubon to 41 that that roadway section will be a great pavement section or a wider pavement section because of the school and maybe some of the other developments out in that area and traffic generated, but where we would anticipate at least a minimum of 3 lanes, if not 4 lanes. So maybe 60 feet wide or something. And Lyman Boulevard would have a trail system also connected along that roadway section connecting to Galpin. Connecting to Chaska and to our new development area to the south of Lyman as well to kind of connecting the community and surrounding cities. W. City Council Meeting — August S, 2005 Mayor Furlong: Okay. Any further questions for Mr. Oehme? No, okay. More questions Councilman Labatt. Councilman Labatt: As I look at the map, one thing that comes up into mind is the right-in/right- out off of Lyman. Have, did we look at that, explore that as a topic as far as the cul-de-sac. We're making another road to come down and providing a right in from westbound and right out from the property to go out to 41 to ... traffic, did we look at that idea? Kate Aanenson: I'll let the City Engineer address that. Paul Oehme: Well my discussions with the County, you know I did not specifically address that with them but again, it comes down to access issues and trying to minimize those access points along the arterial collector roadway system there and again we're trying to eliminate, limit the amount of access points to 4 way intersections. We do not feel that the property south of this proposed development would ever have an access at that point. Mayor Furlong: The property to the south has access, and again where Galpin. Paul Oehme: Yeah, currently. Mayor Furlong: So that would come in at a signaled. Paul Oehme: At a signaled intersection, correct. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Councilman Labatt: They could also connect up through Chaska by the storage place and the water tower when the cul-de-sac comes in. Paul Oehme: Which one is that? Councilman Labatt: Off the nursery. Paul Oehme: Off the, yes they can. Councilman Labatt: Where the water tower is. Paul Oehme: Right, correct. Councilman Labatt: So they'll have a second ingress and egress point. Paul Oehme: That's correct. Councilman Labatt: Where this doesn't. That's the only point. I just think we're missing something with the right-in/right-out. You know it would certain provide access for 2,600 vehicles a day to have a second option to leave the site. I don't know if the County's been 39 0 City Council Meeting — August S, 2005 0 pushed hard enough on that topic to look at that. And I don't know how you'd, if you have to move buildings and redo obviously from what it looks like right now, but something to think about. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Any other follow up questions at this point? Okay. Council discussion. Thoughts or comments. Who'd like to start? You're not limited to one opportunity to discuss either so. Councilman Peterson: Mr. Mayor, fellow council members, residents. You know industrial land in our city and trying to integrate it into communities is tough. There isn't an easy way to do it. I think we all know we need it. At least we all should realize that we need it in our community to balance different types of development throughout the city from a tax base perspective. From a jobs perspective and a variety of others. What we've been dispatched with the responsibility is to figure out where to put that. We, not this council but councils before us and Planning Commissions before us said this was a good spot for it. And so that, with that you know the land owner has rights that they can put an industrial development here. And that's why we're here tonight because the landowner is presenting a concept that believes meets our ordinances and now the Planning Commission and this council are trying to figure out the best way to put this industrial park, office industrial park into a residential neighborhood. That's not easy. But yet again we're tasked to make that happen. And there was discussion about the IOP versus the PUD. It's not a threat. I don't consider it a threat but it's a fact that this is an opportunity to get a better development than would be otherwise and I think that's why we have PUD's and that's why we're kind of on the cutting edge of the State. We use PUD's a lot and I think we've got a lot better developments because of that usage and I think that will certainly come to fruition in this development also. I heard a lot tonight and a lot of my discussions with other residents over the past couple weeks. There's clearly a disparate perspective of everybody and there isn't a consensus between the residents as to what should be done either. You know we heard that tonight. And some realize there should be development and let's make it the best one we can. Some don't want it to be industrial. Others want it to be industrial and be done with it because they knew that was coning. Because they know it's good for the city. So there's a disparate view. To that end as I look at this development in comparison to others in the area, I think it's a good plan. I think that it's been sensitive to neighbors. I think it's been sensitive to the environment. Are there things that we can tweak yet? Yes, and I think we'll do that tonight but all and all I think it's a good plan. It looks, you know we don't know that the building plans haven't come forward so we're not doing site plans so we'll again do our due diligence to make those buildings as architecturally interesting as possible. For those of you who have been around meetings over the last few years, you know .I push for architectural interest, whether it's residential or whether it's industrial. You know I think that we as a council are obligated and we work hard to have creativity and strong building architecture. So all and all I think it is a good development. I think it's, by hopefully the end of the evening we're going to get it as good as it can be. I'm concerned about moving the setbacks because whenever you move a setback it comes at a cost. If you move, increase the setback on Galpin to positively affect Stone Creek, that negatively affects Trotters Ridge so I'm at least you guys aren't sitting in different sections of the room because that's what we're all about balancing here and I think that's what we're going to try to do. So I'm comfortable leaving the setbacks as they are you know and letting the developer present some better ideas on the berming to 6 and the goal is to increase density of the 40 City Council Meeting — August 8, 2005 coverage for views and I think we've got some more work there that staff and the developer can do as we move ahead on the project. You know I think that we can work on some lighting to ensure both the signs and the outdoor lighting are appropriate for the neighborhood. I think that we can limit the building height and I don't know what that number is but at least we can limit the building heights on certain of the lots that are adjacent to residential areas. I think there's less concern on the interior and the ones that are adjacent to the Chaska business park. We've talked about limiting the speakers. Making it a permanent easement of Outlot C, I definitely agree with. And I would like to make, you know a full force effort. If we haven't done everything we possibly can do to get the County to consider accessing in a different area, and obviously the County may not necessarily be the issue to accessing this through the Chaska business district but I don't know if, you know we talked a little bit about this because of the elevations it made it difficult but it would be interesting to at least pursue with the individual landowner if they want to sell and access that way. I didn't hear whether we had tried that and maybe that's another question we have to have with staff or the developer tonight but I'd like to be able to exhaust all the access alternatives that we can and whether or not that's having two access points, to limit. Leaving one at Galpin and put another access point in as another option. So all and all, I think it's a well conceived plan. I think it fits that area as best as we can and be interesting to hear other council people's thoughts on additional items that we can do to make it better. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Other thoughts. Councilwoman Tjornhom. Councilwoman Tjornhom: My turn. Mayor Furlong: Go down the row. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Alright. Well unfortunately when new developments do come in I think there's always the fear that the existing developments will, their integrity will be jeopardized by whatever is coming in and I think that's a legitimate fear here tonight. But just like Councilman Peterson said, this was set in place in a motion in 1991. It wasn't really our deciding. I think if I could change that I would. Put in some nice residential lots would fit in better with the two developments that are there now but unfortunately this is what we have today and we need to work with this. I think it's important that the developer respects the neighbors and the neighborhoods that are established there and they try to work with them and blend in the best they can and I think that is done with appropriate berming and trees. I think, I don't know how you hide an industrial park exactly. Or an office park. I don't know how you do it. I just think it's there and you've got to just make it work somehow and I think the developer seems to be open into trying to make everyone as happy as they can be with what's there. And I think that it probably will be a beautiful development when it's all done. I like the fact that he is going to the effort of saving or preserving the trees on Outlot C. Is that correct? I mean that's something alone I think that he should be commended for. And so I do though have to go with the Planning Commission's recommendation to have the 150 foot setback instead of the 100 foot setback. There's a give and take there and I guess we're going to have to take some trees to get some more privacy and screening for the neighborhood. And I think with that I'll leave it there. Mayor Furlong: Councilman Lundquist. 41 City Council Meeting — August 8, 2005 zn Councilman Lundquist: Comments a lot along the lines that Councilman Peterson eloquently stated. As far as, we got some comments about lack of vision and for the, this part of the city, the city in general, I think I would respectfully disagree with that. We have thousands of pages of documents and studies and time and effort that has been spent on environmental studies and guiding and comprehensive plans and looking at the city from a 30,000 foot view. When you boil it down to this development it might seem that way but as Councilman Peterson stated, there's really not a good way to transition between residential and industrial commercial there because somebody's got to be the border. If you go from single family to townhouses, that was proposed here and the residents don't want, didn't want townhouses there for a variety of reasons. And so there really isn't, and there has to be a mix and so as Councilman Peterson stated our job is to try to do that as best we can. And I think even given the choice oft residential in that area, I'm not sure that's a great thing for that. We certainly would have the ability, albeit difficult to change that but I believe that this designation of industrial and, is the right application for this space so I'm comfortable with that. I would, I think we've done a, the developer has certainly been open to comments from residents and staff. 'I think hopefully this is a good demonstration for residents in these neighborhoods and all over the city that the best way to get your concerns answered is to bring them forward because had the ground swell of all these people here and the a -mails and the phone calls and everything else not happened, it probably, there probably would have been 50 foot tall buildings close to property lines without extra trees and all kinds of things like that so, you know there's a possibility that people will walk. out of here tonight not fully satisfied. But hopefully take a step back and look at what could have been and where there is some give and take and hopefully that will, we come out with the best: possible plan here. And then lastly, before we get into the specifics of the motions and things, I would also agree with Councilman Labatt that we need to go back to the County and push harder. I think that I'd like to explore that right-in/right-out off of Lyman in addition to the access at Galpin. It gives a little bit of more opportunity there, depending on which way you're going and things like that and I understand the County's position. We've seen it in other parts of the city, especially up on Highway 7 where MnDot has been closing access points to that for those major roadways, but you know I think if we push a little harder there's a possibility there. I'm not as hopeful on the Chaska piece. I think it doesn't hurt to ask the question but wouldn't, I. think there's not only private parties involved there but there's some engineering and other topographical issues there as well that prevents, makes that more difficult but perhaps we stand a good chance at a right-in/right-out for the County so. I'll save the specifics for when we get into the motion. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Councilman Labatt. Councilman Labatt: Okay. Thanks to my fellow councilors that were willing to go back and look at that right-in/right-out. Appreciate that. I. think that will send a message to the County that we're not pleased with their quick no to the access and I'm just not sure how I'm going to word that in our proposal unless we table something but one other comment. I think Craig has hit it right on the head here. We can't stop it but now we've got to kind of minimize the impact and the overall problems that can occur, or may occur. So some of the issues that were brought up and I think we all have kind of hit on some of them. I'll just repeat them briefly here. According to the staff we can limit the height of the buildings to 30 feet..I think we need to do 42 City Council Meeting — August 8, 2005 g that on Buildings 5 and 6. Make them 30 feet. One level and include the parapet and the screening. I appreciate the cross section that the developer provided but when you Iook at, it's at the walk out level at the 6 foot height. When she gets to the kitchen or master bedrooms, we're defeating the purpose of the trees and the berming so I'd like to limit that and include something in there about the parapet for screening. In reference to the berm, I mean if we're looking at 3 to 5 years out up on that Lot 6, granted those trees are going to be planted up there along what I'll call the north line. The north property line. Is that correct, the trees will be, those trees will be planted up there? On the north rim. Ben Merriman: All those will be planted at the time of the development, so they'll be planted this fall or next spring. Councilman Labatt: Okay. The only thing I would ask, for those that are going to be planted there maybe we can do some sort of berming then and not have to wait for the Building 6 to go up. If they're going to plant those trees, maybe put something in there to work on the drainage problem on Lots 2, 3 and 4. Maybe just address them a bit but I'll just, there's a drainage problem up there. On Lots 2, 3 and 4. Ben Merriman: Well with respect to the drainage problem, yeah we can pretty much solve the drainage problem by putting in a culvert that will pick up excess water approximately where it's pooling. There's an area where it's pooling a little bit west of Lot 2 or I guess I don't know the lot numbers but the water's pooling up high in an area where we'll try to pick up the water and we pick up all your water off that berm. With respect to building a berm. Councilman Labatt: The little berm. I mean you can do that first swale of your cross section, you can do that first swale. Ben Merriman: Yeah, it's a good idea. Inasmuch as it will give those trees, one it starts the berm and two, it gives the trees a chance to get growing. Councilman Labatt: Thanks. I think we've discussed Outlot C. and making that a permanent designation. We've talked about no outdoor speaking. The lighting on the buildings. We just need to form a motion on that. Outdoor speaking? Avoid a lot of talks during breaks so they go outside. And then the building 1, I think the developer with the mayor's help and Todd's help will squeeze those buildings together. Other than that, you know let's just figure out how we can get the County to give us a right-in/right-out. I mean if they're going to upgrade Lyman, it only makes sense and maybe we can have the developer come up and talk about how he could tweak that road or somehow make that road into a Y with a right-in/right-out off of Lyman if possible. Mayor Furlong: Okay. I think initial reaction to that, I'm not opposed to looking at a right- in/right-out. I would be hesitant to change zoning and approve a preliminary plan unless we know what the effect of that would be on the rest of the development. And particularly I'm looking at, what I heard was, you start moving things you're going to start, you move it all within there so there's a number of trees that are being preserved and others planted to the east of Lot 4. If it's Lot 3, needs to be pushed to the west to allow the right-in/right-out, what that's going to do to the rest of that. I'm not proposing but as you look at it, you know it's probably 43 City Council Meeting -- August 8, 2005 g going to bring that right-in/right-out to the west of Lot 2. I'm not opposed to that. If it picks up anything, some people would be in favor of it and I'm not going to be opposed to that either. I don't know how much it will pick up but we can look at it. But I think internally I. guess Councilwoman Tjornhom to your point too in terms of the increase setback on the north property line, I'd be hesitant to approve apreliminary plan without seeing what the affect of that has on Outlot C....to the west, as I'm looking at it, that's where all the grove of trees are right now and so we may end up you know defeating what we're trying to accomplish here, but there's going to be some balance. Somebody moving towards Galpin on Bridle Creek may prefer that. Now on 50 somebody living to the west may prefer to have the trees, so I think I'd be hesitant to make that change without ... effect or the right-in/right-out with the effect of the overall. Having addressed just some reaction to those specifics. I think overall there's been some question about the quality of the project, what's being proposed. Is this right for our city? I have a,hard time saying that it's not right for our city in part because of not just our neighborhoods that are around it but the rest of the comprehensive plan and what's being developed. Traffic is a big issue here and traffic along Galpin as I mentioned to some residents, as Galpin was upgraded a number of years ago, it was done with the expectation that development and this type of development would occur on this property as well as properties to the south. It is a, as roads go, it's a very nice one. The shoulders are about a lane wide right now. With right turn lanes. There's trails on both sides of it, with grass median between the road and the trail. So from a safety standpoint.I think it's a pretty safe road. Can we, you know there's going to be more traffic on it as we continue to develop regardless of whether this development goes through or not so, you know from a traffic standpoint, let's look at the right-in/right-out and ask that question again. I know that question was re -asked after the Planning Commission by staff for access off Lyman. Let's re -ask it again but again I'd be hesitant to approve anything tonight without knowing what the effect internally would be because we may not be evaluating what that's accomplishing. At what cost. To Councilman Labatt's points in terms of building heights, I too believe that a reduced building height would be appropriate in this area. Certainly along the northern properties. The Lot I we're already picking up some feet but I wouldn't be opposed to looking at two height, or two story height. At least not on the borders. Perhaps throughout the development as well, so I'd be interested in my fellow councilmember's thoughts on that. Overall I think the PUD process here made this development better than what it would have been. There will be more trees preserved. There will be better architecturally designed buildings. There will be the movement within to help improve and there will be an emphasis on landscaping which is above and beyond. In fact what I heard was double what our ordinance requires so there clearly are improvements here. Is it achieving everything that everybody would want? No. Is it a good balance between what the developer's right to develop their property and what the neighbors are responding? My sense is yes. Are there some tweaks that we can do? Perhaps as my fellow council members mentioned and we can get into that detail so..I, like Councilman Lundquist said earlier, sincerely appreciate the a -mails and information and correspondence that we receive from all the residents. While we are not allowed to talk to each other during meetings, it doesn't mean we can't still pick up a phone and call Mr. Gerhardt or Ms. Aanenson or Mr. Oehme and ask some of these questions so a lot of the questions that you brought up tonight or started bringing up 2 weeks ago, we've already been pursuing those and that's helpful to try to make that process more efficient. Is to get those questions out. Get them answered. Double checked just because the staff and the developer come forward with a plan and maybe they've asked the question, I'll use access as an example. Does that mean that we shouldn't ask again the County can we get access off Lyman? 44 City Council Meeting — August 8, 2005 That question's been re -asked. Now we're saying maybe we have to go back and say instead of full access can we do right-in/right-out. And that's reasonable. That's part of the process and I think ultimately we're going to end up with a better project. It may not be everything that everybody's looking for. It may be, it will certainly be different for those that have views of the property from their home but I think we're making the best of what's available and actually making better than just what our simple ordinance would allow. And I appreciate all your input into the process. So I've got a number of things. I think probably duplicate with a number of other lists in terms of things we're looking for. We want to try to move forward with a motion we can certainly do that. Depending on the nature, some of the add's we may want to defer but let's open it up and see what people think. We want to try to put a motion together and work through it we can. Some of your thoughts and comments if there's a desire to seek some changes, we may want to give some specific direction. Not that we're going to re -open or keep everything open but try to gather some more information that we need as a council before we can make a decision. So thoughts. Councilman Lundquist. Councilman Lundquist: Mayor, clarification. Kate. What, between preliminary and final, if we were to go back to the County and ask that right-in/right-out question, that's obviously going to shift some buildings and stuff like that. Preference for you and your staff. Would you rather have this tabled and come back in 2 weeks or would you rather have a condition about another formal request for right-in/right-out and deal with the effect of that between preliminary and final? Kate Aanenson: Either way. I guess my concern is if we leave it open then we're going to go back. If we can just synthesize what the critical points are that you want us to work on, I'd be comfortable with a table. I just, I know in talking to, at another meeting with Roger Gustafson, some of the neighbors have contacted him directly. I can tell you what's going to happen tomorrow. He's going to get a lot of phone calls and some arm twisting because he's had some of that already so you know, and we're going to be up there too so I guess if we kind of stick to a short list of... Councilman Lundquist: Well here's the crux of my point. I'm firm enough on the right-in/right- out where I'm not going to wait 15 minutes going through this if you tell me that you want this tabled to talk about a right-in/right-out, I'm going to make a motion to table and we won't mess with the rest of the stuff tonight and we'll do it in 2 weeks. If you say, you think you can work through it, then we'll muddle through the motion and put that as a condition and go. Kate Aanenson: But my concern is if you don't get the right -in and right -out, then what? Councilman Lundquist: Well we can word that condition such that it's a formal request and not a you know. Kate Aanenson: I'll defer that to the City Attorney what he thinks is probably the better way to go. Councilman Lundquist: Who's the politician now? 45 City Council Meeting -- August 8, 2005 Roger Knutson: My issue with this, I don't know how you can effectively approve it with taking a look at right -in and right -out. I don't know how that works. Let's say the County says right- inlright-out's okay. Then I would assume from what I'm hearing, without being a planner, you'd need a substantial redesign of the whole darn thing. Or you could. I don't know. Kate Aanenson: I would agree because more than likely if you're going to put a right -in and out you'd have to eliminate some of those buildings because you're going to have to put a public street in there. Right now you'd be coming, if you went on the other side of Lot 1, that's a driveway where there's parking. And if you're taking truck traffic, if that's the goal, then you'd have to make that a street so it would, I would agree that it'd take some significant so if you want us to do that, then probably tabling is probably better. And then we can clean up the motion and get all those conditions in regarding the lighting, the signage, the conservation easement, the height and get that all modified into the conditions of approval. f Councilman Lundquist: Do we have any time restraints that we're up against? Roger Knutson: I believe we're up against the 60 days but we can take another 60. I believe the application was filed June 17th. Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Roger Knutson: So we have time. Mayor Furlong:.I think to the extent Councilman Lundquist, if that's our request I'd like to see the effect of that. If the County comes back and approves it, what's the effectof that on the design because ultimately again we're dealing with balance. I think Councilman Peterson said that and we, you know I'm not opposed to asking the question but I'm not going to prejudge that if we have a right-in/right-out that we're going to end up with a better design. And so if that's the desire, there are a number of things here. What I would suggest is, let's make sure, let's give the staff specific direction. Now that we have to revisit all the issues again when it comes back up under old business but let's give them specific direction on what we'd like to see in terms of some of the issues and let's get more information from staff on that and working with the developer to say you know if we do this, here's the effect. So that as a council we can look at the effect of that. And cost benefit. Valuation. Does that make sense? Councilman Lundquist: Absolutely. Mayor.Furlong: Okay. Councilman Lundquist: I was more trying to be respectful of the time for the developer to not have another 2 weeks to wait but understand that... Mayor Furlong: Yeah I think this is important enough to a number of people that taking the 2 weeks would make some sense, and I'm assuming by making that statement that we think that we can get some of these answers back, or reasonable answers back within a 2 week period. Kate and Mr. Merriman. 46 City Council Meeting — August S, 2005 Ben Merriman: Well it's kind of a County issue. Mayor Furlong: Well right but your issue is, and what information we'd be looking for is if the County allows the right-in/right-out, what does that do to inside the development. Ben Merriman: You redesign it. You redesign all of the projects... just reinventing the wheel to the interior of the project. Mayor Furlong: And for clarification here, what we're looking for, what I'm hearing is not the elimination of the access of Galpin but the addition of a right-in/right-out off Lyman. Is that, I see heads going up and down so. Kate Aanenson: To be clear we may come back with two plans. One showing the impact and then the original plan and you can pick. Mayor Furlong: And to the extent that there's effects on the development from some of these other things that we'll talk through, I guess Mr. Merriman we'd be interested in hearing that as well, you know in terms of building heights and maybe we should just, let's formulate it as specifically as we can some of the issues we'd like to see in terms of added conditions. Councilman Peterson do you want to start with a couple of your's or what you have? Councilman Peterson: Yeah I'll plant the seed with staff but limited signage and lighting to minimize the impact on the neighborhood. To work with the developer to limit the building height. I'm not ready to say a foot right now but see what is reasonable and prudent. Outlot C with a dedication, permanent casement... Speakers. I think one of the conditions already highlights tree protection during the building process. I mean it's still going to be enforced. A lot of what we're doing is because of the trees so we may want to move our normal setback from the, to another few feet out for the silt fencing. I think that's all for me. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Councilwoman Tjornhom. Any specifics? Councilwoman Tjornhom: You know I think Councilman Peterson's gotten a majority of them. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Councilman Lundquist. Councilman Lundquist: The only other one we've got condition 54 in here now that talks about the drainage issues with Lot 2. Like to see that modified to incorporate a generality with the Trotters Ridge lots and then also if it's possible to incorporate the Outlot C runoff as they spoke in the drainage calculations. Mayor Furlong: If I could concur. Rather than relating it to drainage on the development to the north, let's relate it to this development so Lot 6 and Lot C, Outlot C from the development standpoint, storm water standpoint, and I think there was a question on storm water over on Lot 5 as well. Some request there so. 47 Y City Council Meeting — August 8, 2005 Councilman Lundquist: Then the others have been stated already. I would propose at this point that I would be willing to support the 30 foot building height for Lots 5 and 6. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Councilman Lundquist: Whereas the rest would be left as in the design standards. MayorFurlong: Okay. Councilman Labatt. Any specific direction or information requested of staff? Councilman Labatt: No, you guys hit them all. I support the 30 foot on ... 5 and 6 and that includes the parapet. And everything else was hit so. Mayor Furlong: Yeah. The only other thing was just working with the developer to evaluate the, with the lowering of the building on Lot 1. What is the effect of traffic within there and we may lose some opportunity if we have a right-in/right-out there and a public street, but we might pick up on the, anything to save trees on the east side we might lose because we have to put a public street in there so that's, but what the effects would be in terms of traffic flow internally if there are opportunities there on where the balancing points are. Is the other issue. Okay, anything else? If not, with that direction to staff is there a motion to table. Councilman Lundquist: I move that we table item A, B and C. Councilman Labatt: Second. Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to table the request for rezoning of property from Agricultural Estate (A2) to Planned Unit Development (PUD), Preliminary.PIat and Wetland Alteration Permit on property located on the northwest corner of Lyman Boulevard and Galpin Boulevard, Chanhassen West Business Park, Planning Case 05-23. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. (The City Council took a short recess at this point in the meeting.) REQUEST FOR REZONING OF PROPERTY FROM A2 TO PUD-R; SUBDIVISION WITH VARIANCES OF APPROXIMATELY 91 ACRES INTO 84 LOTS 3 OUTLOTS AND PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY; SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR 459 TOWNHOUSE UNITS• WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT• CONDITIONALUSE PERMIT FOR: ALTERATION OF THE FLOOD PLAIN; AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT LOCATED EAST OF AUDUBON ROAD, SOUTH OF LYMAN BOULEVARD, AND NORTH OF PIONEER TRAIL LIBERTY ON BLUFF CREEK. APPLICANT TOWN AND COUNTRY HOMES PLANNING CASE NO.05-11. 48 6 0 os -1:43 Planning Commission Meeting -- July 19, 2005 20. No alterations are allowed within the primary corridor or within the first 20 feet of the setback from the primary corridor. All structures must meet. the 40-foot setback from the primary corridor. 21. Based on the existing canopy coverage for the site, the developer will need to meet minimum planting requirements. 22. Bufferyard planting will be required along the south and west property lines. 23. Landscaping for the attached housing area should include native species for overstory and foundation plantings as well as non-native, ornamental selections. 24. Large groupings of•materials will help extend the natural areas into the developed sites and create privacy for residents. 25. A strong, boulevard tree planting element. is recommended within the development and required along any collector roads. 26. The development should establish viewsheds to be preserved as part of the development." .All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. (The.Planning Commission took a short recess at this point in the meeting.) PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR REZONING OF PROPERTY FROM AGRICULTURAL ESTATE DISTRICT A2 TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT UD PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, AND WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT ON PROPERTY LOCATED_ ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF LYMAN BOULEVARD AND GALPIN BOULEVARD, CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS PARK, EDEN TRACE CORPORATION PLANNING CASE NO.05-23. Public Present: Name Address Tom Witek Jim Leonard JoEllen Radermacher LuAnn Sidney Rick Buan Mimi & Nate Espe Cathy &Kevin DiLorenzo Ron Blum Christine & Mark Fischer Peggy Emerson 2318 Stone Circle Drive 2360 Stone Circle Drive 2479 Bridle Creek Trail 2431 Bridle Creek Trail 2569 Stone Creek Lane West 2300 Stone Creek Lane West 2382 Stone Creek Lane West 2081 Stone Creek Drive 2407 Bridle Creek Trail 8409 Stone Creek Court 40 swneo s Planning Commission Meeting — July 19, 2005 Aleta & Alex Donaldson 2460 Bridle Creek Trail Steve & Sarah Dale 2487 Bridle Creek Trail James Wise 2747 Wagner Drive Peter Sidney 2431 Bridle Creek Trail Roger & Gay Schmidt 8301 Galpin Boulevard Paul & Amina Rinkes 2208 Boulder Road Mike Krych 2127 Boulder Road Rodney & Janice Melton 2413 Bridle Creek Trail Barry LaBounty 2421 Bridle Creek Trail McDonald: Before we start on this I'd like to make a couple announcements. First of all Mark Undestad is not going to participate in this portion of the meeting because of a conflict of interest. Secondly, this particular proposal before us has drawn a lot of comments and a lot of concerns from the people that live over in Trotters Ridge. We received numerous letters. I know individually we received letters. The council has also received letters. Everything has been forwarded to all members of the commission. We have read all of your letters and all of your comments. One of the other things I would like to also address is that I know I did receive some phone calls that I did not return. I'm not sure if anyone else on the commission did, but the policy of the commission is to not have an exparte communications with individuals and the reason for that is that we want to make sure that everyone gets a uniform response to their questions and answers. We welcome your questions to us and they are addressed by staff and also by the commission. With that we will now start the hearing on this particular project and I will ask for a report from staff. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. McDonald: Let's start with Debbie. Larson: I have a question for you. I went out and looked at the site today and my concern tends to be with Lots 1 through 5 say. The homes that are over there. Beautiful homes over there. There are no trees within this area and this building's going to go up and I'm wondering if they're planning on putting substantial tree cover and buffer in there. I mean it says there's a 100 foot buffer but is it going to block the side of the building because if I lived there, and certainly would like it to be camouflaged as much as possible. Generous: Yes to both of that. They are proposing some berming. As part of the letter you received, the neighbors have requested some larger berming and the applicant has actually had a neighborhood meeting with them and so I'll let him present what he's agreed to do on that. But there is extensive landscaping that our buffer yard requirements have to go in and that would be done as part of the subdivision review, so those trees would go in no matter, let's say lots may not build for another 2 to 3 years but the trees that they put on the edges will time to grow over in this area. And they're also looking at some switching on the site because they're over on some areas and under on others so they're going to meet all those areas where they're under. On the west side where they're over, they're going to transfer that to the north side I believe... 41 02:VM23 Planning Commission Mofing,—July 19 2005 t Larson: Okay. And my other question is, it kind of looks like where this Lot C would be in, and actually maybe even part of Lot S. It looks like quite a ravine that leads up to where the homes are. Is that going to be the area that you're talking about that's going to be filled in? And will it be filled in all the way back up to where the homes are? Generous: I don't know that it's totally all the way up there. Larson: And maybe it's because the trees on Outlot C were high: Maybe that's. Generous: They're raising that whole area on the east and then on the end of that they're going to put the berm into so. Larson: So if they raise that, that raises your building higher too, correct? r Generous: Yes. Larson: Okay. Generous: Also it's down low from, if you look at it from. the road, it will still be below that elevation where they have the parking lot elevation and then the first floor is a little bit up above that. Larson: So what's the purpose of raising that? Is it a drainage issue or is it a? Generous: Well partially it's also to prepare the site for development. and to make sure that the, everything, the utilities all work because they're going to put the road in and they have to meet minimum driveway elevations so they can't be too steep on that. .Larson: Because like I say, it puts the buildings down in the ditch, then the people wouldn't have an issue. Okay, that's all I have. McDonald: Okay. Dan. Keefe: Yeah, I think you spoke to this a little bit in the report and maybe just a little bit now. Can you address the access to Lyman Boulevard? Generous: I think I would defer to Alyson on that. Morris: Good evening. I've had some conversations with Bill Weckman over at Carver County Public Works. With both Galpin and Lyman being county roads, we really defer to the county regarding access. Mr. Weckman has expressed that the county prefers the access to be at Galpin. They are looking at Lyman Boulevard to be an east/west collector. The significance of that being an east/west collector throughout the county is, particularly with the 212 project. How that meets up with 212 there. They want to limit the access onto Lyman Boulevard for safety reasons so that Lyman Boulevard can carry a larger amount of traffic with fewer conflict areas, i.e. where an intersection would be. The other reason for the proposed access to be at Galpin is the city 42 Planning Commission Meeting-- July 19, 2005 standard for access spacing on this type of road. The 2020 comp plan has directed a regional analysis of the roadway system identifying both Lyman and Galpin as arterial roads. As such they recommended access spacing guidelines. The city's code requires a 1,320 foot spacing. If you're looking at Lyman Boulevard and also with the wetland in the southwest corner there, the closest, or pardon me the further away they can have an access from Galpin is 1,000 feet, so it wouldn't meet the city's requirement but it would meet the city's access spacing as far as intersecting at another cross street, i.e. the street to the east. So that was the reasoning we went through with this proposed access to Galpin. Keefe: How far is the current access from Lyman? Morris: The current access from Lyman actually does not meet the city standard. That's correct. But it does meet, it's a lesser of two evils if you will. Neither access would meet the access spacing. However there's currently an access to Galpin at, I apologize. I can't remember the cross street. At Stone Creek Drive, so that's the place that they said to have the location for the street connection. Keefe: Okay. Let me see that one ... to the building height and the buffering between Trotters Ridge and the proposed buildings. It looks like the design standards that you're proposing would not allow a building over 40 feet, and we're looking at an elevation of it looks like around 956 I think, so we're looking at a substantial height for a building. You know you have to take about 40, essentially we don't know that they're going to go to that necessarily and they have to come in for review on each particular lot, is that correct? Generous: That's correct. They have to do a site plan review. Keefe: Okay. And is berming that they're proposing what is on, and I'm not sure if I've got the right plan or not but is 966 the berming height they're proposing? Generous: What showed up on the original plan. Keefe: Yeah, okay. Generous: It should be 3 feet above the ground floor elevation. Keefe: Okay, and then that's on the northeast corner and then to the northwest corner we're looking at, I mean I don't even see any berming. Generous: No, they're using some distance in that instance. Keefe: Yeah, so you've got 200 feet. 200 feet from the property line and okay. Generous: And then preservation of the existing vegetation and then additional landscaping. Keefe: At least on my plan I'm looking at, it doesn't appear that there's many trees, but I may be not looking at the right thing in that northwest corner. 43 Planning Commission Meeting— July .19, 2005 Generous: No there's not. Significant trees. Keefe: Northwest. Well really in either case from what .I could tell. I mean Outlot C had all the trees. . Generous: Yes. The majority. Keefe: Right. And then Lots 5 and 6 it looks like are, don't have a lot of trees on them so okay. Generous: No. If you go up...you can see from the entrance all the way down to the development. i M Keefe: Right. I'm particularly sensitive to the residents to the north and trying to make it as little visual intrusion as we can in regards to that. Okay. McDonald: Okay? Deborah. Zorn: Comeback tome. McDonald: Okay. Kurt. Papke: What's the responsibility of the developer and the city in terms of the drainage on the northeast corner? This kind of gets back to one of the points that was raised before when you put, if you look at the topo maps here, there's a natural drainage to the south to the wetland and I have some concerns with Trotters Ridge. It looks like Lot number 1, 2, 3 and 4 maybe 5, all drain towards that berm. How would that be accommodated in this plan? Would there be a storm sewer? Would there be a swale? I mean these people probably don't want a pond in their back yard. What's, what would, how would that be mitigated? Generous: Well I know there's already a pipe in the back yard to take water to the north. I'm not sure if it's, the developer could probably. Papke: Maybe we can defer until you, maybe defer until it's your... The other question I had on the plans is, on the west side of Lot 6 there's a retaining wall that goes down to the cul-de-sac. That looks like that's quite substantial. If I'm reading the plan correctly, it's not marked on the plan but if I just look at the elevations and so on, it looks to be almost a 12 or a 13 foot retaining wall. Does that kind of match your understanding of the plans? Is it a pretty good sized wall? Generous: Yes, that's my understanding that that, so they don't have to grade into that treed area. Papke: Okay. The intersection of the proposed access road with Galpin and Stone Creek there, I assume it would have to be at least a two way stop obviously, but are you looking at a potential four way or how will traffic be controlled at that intersection? 44 0 0 Planning Commission Meeting --July 19, 2005 Morris: Traffic control at that intersection again we'd have to refer to the county since it's under their jurisdiction. We can certainly work with the developer so that they can post a stop sign at their entrance. I think that would be a good place to have them stopping traffic so that they can make a safe passage out to Galpin. Papke: So were you talking about a stop sign on Galpin to, or from the exit of the development? Moms: From the exit of the development. Papke: So you would not foresee any kind of a four way stop at that intersection? It would strictly be a two way stop at best, is what I hear you saying. Morris: At Galpin and the proposed access? Papke: Yes. Morris: I would, at this point we can, all we can do is get them to have a stop at their intersection. To make Galpin a four way stop we have to then bring the county in because it's their jurisdiction. Papke: Okay, thank you. McDonald: Okay. Now we'll go back to Deborah. Zorn: Bob, is it safe to assume that each of the individual lots will be further discussed at another time, but is it safe to assume that all these lots are showing a 40 foot height building and that respective parking would include that so if the buildings were proposed to be lower, that parking would decrease. Generous: I don't know that we were looking at the 40 foot height. I think they were spreading these out more, but the parking would correspond to the square footages that they had in their site plan. Concept site plan. So yes, if they had smaller buildings on the individual lots the parking would be down. If they are two lots together that had complimentary units, we could look at shared parking. Zorn: Okay. Keefe: I have one Jerry. McDonald: Okay. Keefe: Going back to the access onto Galpin. Do you have any sense on what the traffic count will be corning out of this development? One of my concerns is now if these buildings are built individually, it would be nice to sort of have a sense on what we're really dealing with in regards to traffic. Because it sure looks like a lot of parking. 45 Planning Commission Meeting — July 19 2005 s Larson: Yeah, it looks like a lot of parking. Morris: Bob did a preliminary analysis of the number of trips based on the most intense use of the property. Based on that he came up with 26, just around 2,600 trips. Again looking at the 2020 comp plan transportation, they use the land use as their guide when they generated traffic volumes. Since their proposed land use of this parcel is consistent with the 2020 plan, we can feel with confidence that the numbers that were generated in our comp plan showing that Galpin as it is right now, .52 foot wide street is sufficiently designed to carry that additional traffic. Keefe: Just to follow up on that. The type of use being office industrial would be, you know leads you to believe there might be some larger trucks going in and out of there. I know there's some going in and out of there today but if you're talking 2,600 trips, you'd be talking a substantial increase potentially in what goes in there. Can you give me your thoughts in regards to volume of larger trucks going up and down, you know the increase in the volume of larger trucks going up and down Galpin. I mean do we try to guide them in any particular way out to Lyman or do we have them go up Galpin or give me some sense on the traffic flow in regards to. Moms: Well without knowing the exact uses on the property it's very difficult to give you a number of tractor trailer turning movements into and out of the property. What we can look at is on a regional basis where would these tractor trailer units be coming from and the most logical route that they would take. Ultimately if they're coming from an east/west they would take 212 up to Lyman, north on Galpin. That's just a guess. As far as a turning movement there. In order to improve the safety at the intersection, I did talk to the county engineer about striping and turn lanes. Right now there's right turn lanes for both north and southbound traffic on Galpin at the intersection of Stone Creek, and the entrance to the site there. When I talked to him about that, about the possibility of striping a turn lane, he expressed that the county wants to have a consistent striping pattern throughout that corridor. That they would keep, if this project were to move ahead they would keep an eye on the traffic volumes going in that area, and at that pointon a system wide basis of going and striping turn lanes which would have a taper into a left turn lane and then the sufficient length of the left turn lane going, if you're going northbound on Galpin, to make a left turn onto this public street to access the proposed development. So we've done a lot of, we've had a lot of conversations with the county trying to work with the resident's concerns. I understand we want to keep traffic off Galpin but also looking at, on a regional basis, what the county wants for a regional corridor and trying to make the proposed access on Galpin as safe as possible. McDonald: Could I just follow up on that, while we're talking about that. With the number of trips you're talking about and the parking spaces and the potential for the people that are in there and everything, what would trip a traffic light study at that point? Because come 5:00 you get everybody in the world trying to get out of there. We're creating a problem. Morris: To do an analysis as to whether a signal is warranted, there's several warrants that need to be met in order to meet the requirement to get a traffic signal. They include traffic volumes, traffic speeds, accidents, accidents with fatalities, that sort. of thing. Those are the criteria for a street light. That's not closing that, of course we don't want to have fatalities out there, but those are the warrants for traffic signals. 46 0 0 Planning Commission Meeting —July 19, 2005 McDonald: Now who controls that? Do we have any input into it or because it's a county road, is that strictly something that they would control? Morris: Unfortunately I don't have a lot of experience with Carver County. I've had more experience with Dakota County and I guess it's whether or not they wait until all the warrants are met or if they feel that they want, if they foresee the need for a street light there, for a traffic light there. If they want to do something of that nature. The forecasted volumes on Galpin actually within the 212 project going through are, there's a reduction in the forecasted volume because 212 will alleviate some of the traffic off Galpin, so there is, you know there is some positive... with 212 going through there, there will be reduced volumes on Galpin. But again it's, with the county being in control of that, that road, we would have to defer to see -what they would do. McDonald: Well let me ask you this. What input do we have to get the county to look at that? I mean do we get to call them up and say hey, we've got a lot of traffic there. We want to see a study. We want to see something done, or are we just at their mercy? Morris: We certainly could, and like I said I've had several conversations with the county engineer. He's been very responsive to the proposed project and the questions that have come up by residents, so we could certainly ask what his thoughts are regarding a signal at that location. McDonald: Okay, and again the whole thing kind of depends upon the details of what goes into these lots. I mean the way it's laid out right now ... the mercy of waiting until the details fall into place. But this is something that we do stay on top of and watch and okay. Papke: Could you explain the rationale or the logic behind how 212 will reduce traffic on Galpin. It seems somewhat counter intuitive in that right now most of the homeowners along Galpin would naturally drive up to Highway 5 and now with 212, the natural inclination would be to drive down to Lyman. Take Lyman to the 212 on ramp at Lyman and 101. So it seems, you know it doesn't you know seem immediately obvious to me that that would be the case. Another thing, considering the other two projects we've approved tonight, there's going to be a lot of population down in the AUAR area and we have Lifetime Fitness now and the natural path from the AUAR to Lifetime Fitness is right up Galpin. Okay, so I'm kind of struggling with, you know and I understand the computer models and everything but I'm kind of struggling with you know how, you know is this really going to be indicative of the kinds of traffic levels we're going to see. Morris: I apologize... regarding how 212 helps out on the traffic volumes. With the traffic going to the site. Being able to access from 212 to Lyman then going north on Galpin versus taking 5, Galpin and going southbound. Reducing the length of Galpin that they would have to travel. And unfortunately I haven't seen any of the traffic forecasts for 212 to see how the different divergents go. In the 2020 comp plan they do have the forecasted volume for Galpin with 212 being in place. The 2010 count would be 6,000 with 212 being in place. Otherwise it would have been 10,000, so they have their computer models that take all the streets and place the collector roads in place and that's how they generate those numbers. Unfortunately I'm not aware of how the traffic is being directed by the anticipated growth on Galpin. 47 i Planning Commission Meeting— July 19, 2005 Larson: I've got one more. You know I'm not quite fully understanding, and maybe you could, you explained it once but it didn't sink. in. Explain to me why we can't have the entrance on Lyman versus Galpin. I'm looking at this. A logical spot would be between the pond and 2, to me. Are there safety reasons or what's the reason why they couldn't come in off of that road? Morris: Okay. There's from two different perspectives. From the county's perspective, they want to limit the access onto Lyman Boulevard because they see it as an east/west collector road through the county where they want to take larger traffic volumes with minimal entrances to make it a safer path, a safer road. Minimal road connections to it. Larson: But aren't you compromising the safety of Galpin for the safety of Lyman?�y.You know what I mean? I mean I'm just thinking, you know the residents here and all the traffic, I'm looking at these parking spaces and I'm going man, that's a lot of traffic going in and out of there. They're going to be going both directions. Not necessarily one way or the other. Morris: Right. Lyman also has a higher traffic volume. Projected traffic volume than Galpin does. Larson: Not after this... I mean truly I'm looking at these parking spots and I'm just counting what, and you know there's a lot. Morris: Well. the information that we had was, like I said, the SRF analysis with the 2020 camp plan which included, which analyzed the whole, the city wide based on existing and proposed land use. Existing and proposed road systems, and based on that information they came up with a traffic volume of 6,000 vehicles per day on Galpin, which is a little higher than what it is right now. That's for the 2010 count. That's the 2010 projection. So with Lyman having higher traffic volume the county wanting to use Lyman Boulevard as an east/west collector, that was one of the reasons why we weren't proceeding with the access to Lyman. The second one was that the city's requirement for, with Lyman Boulevard being classified as an arterial, the city's requirement is that any access, accesses have to be 1,320 feet apart and/or meet an existing intersection. So it doesn't meet the city's requirement for spacing. However as Councilmember Papke had mentioned, the proposed access doesn't meet that 1,320 foot spacing requirement either. However it does meet up with Stone Creek Drive, which is an existing intersection. Larson: But it's residential. You know what'I mean? Moms: I agree, and. Larson: It's not the same kind of road to me. It's a residential thing going into trucks and other things and to me that seems not logical in my opinion, but that's what they're, because it's a road they just consider it. Morris: It's an existing intersection. We're responding to the county's request. Larson: Sorry. Didn't mean to drill you. 0 Planning Commission Meeting — July 19, 2005 0 Morris: No, that's okay. McDonald: Further questions from the council. Commission. Larson: Yeah, I have one more actually. McDonald: Okay. Larson: Getting back to the building site for Lot 6. There's, I know that we've got a proposed height of 40 feet. Could that possibly be reduced rather than accommodating, such as a 3 story, maybe a 2 story building? Would that be a consideration just for that lot, because other, the other residents seem to have a nice buffer. You know the ponds and the trees and everything, but that lot, I mean those people in those homes, they're going to be looking at buildings and I don't know if that would be a consideration that they could just for that particular one. Generous: As part of the PUD you could make specific standards for specific lots. Larson: Okay, well that would be something that I would be interested in pursuing if in fact this goes through. Keefe: That's a good question. So would we do that at this point or would we do it at individual site review? Generous: No, you would have to do it as part of the design standards. To create those building parameters. An example would be Villages on the Ponds. On the east side of the project there's a two story height limit. As you go to the middle of the project it's a 4 story height limit. McDonald: Any further questions? Okay, seeing no further questions from the commissioners, I would ask if the applicant is present and wants to address the commission. Ben Merriman: Good evening Chairman and commissioners. My name is Ben Merriman. I'm with Eden Trace Corporation. I'm the developer of the site. Would like to just kind of go over the site plan a little bit and how we arrived at some of the design standards that we have in working with the city. Address a couple of issues that have come up. First of all, if we can go to this drawing. When we looked at this site, it was a lot of different things ... and then after reviewing it with staff ...put this into a preserve. This whole Outlot C goes into a preserve. That preserves these trees. Now we were dealing with additional trees that run through this way, and there are some more here and down here. We preserved these by running the lot line from these two lots right down the center of the trees. So with the setbacks of those lots we're able to save a great deal or all of these trees that are in green right here. We're also saving the trees that are here, and along here. We are losing some in here. This area actually is raised by about 6 feet, so this area comes up through here. Comes up about 6 feet so we will lose some of these trees through here. We did look at an access point coming off of Lyman that came up through this way and at the county's request it was switched to here. We had both, we looked at both alternatives and this is the county's request. We're doing a couple of unique things with respect 49 Planning Commission Meeting —July 19, 2005 to water on the overall site and then I'll address some of the questions that have arisen in this I00 foot setback. with the neighbors to the north in Trotters Ridge. In most of our developments we take all the water off the impervious surface, off the roof, oft` the parking lots and it runs into a pipe and then it's piped down to a regional pond. What we're going to try on this development is to take the water off of these impervious surfaces and actually into the ditches. We're going to design the ditches so that they run towards the regional pond and then pipe it across roads and then into the regional pond. And what this does is it allows a lot of the water to actually penetrate back into the soils in this area versus going directly to the holding pond, so it's a new type of way to transfer the water and we think it will work quite well. We've also in this area up in here again to preserve some of the trees, what we did is we put a shared driveway through here and we kind of bent it into the Lot 4 and 5, so Lot 4 and 5, this lot and this lot will share a driveway versus each one having their own, and that preserves some of the additional trees and from there. With respect to trucks, yes. This will create traffic and the traffic counts that they projected I think are probably fairly accurate. With respect to large semi truck traffic, these buildings, people may say that a 50,000 square foot building is a large building. It actually isn't that large when it comes to a distribution type of a facility. If you're going to have a distribution facility and run large semi trucks, which are going to carry large volume of product, you're probably going to be in a building that's going to be 150 to 300,000 square feet. And they're prevalent around the Twin Cities. And so that's the type of building that would house a large semi truck traffic. Most: of our developments, and we've developed a number of different properties here in Chanhassen, are companies that are in very light manufacturing. Some are in software companies. It's a very diverse mix of companies. And most of them, we don't have anyone that's in heavy manufacturing of any type and we don't have anyone that's really per se in distribution as well. We have some people that re -package items and then send them out. They're just duplicating type machines. Those type of things. Want to talk one more thing about this retaining wall was brought up and it is a fairly steep retaining wall. And what that allows us to do is to, if we build this retaining wall we can get access to this lot and we can also preserve and stay out of the drip line of all those trees. If we slope it, it becomes a longer, elongated and we're looking at doing that so we may reduce this retaining wall some by sloping but there will be a retaining wall in here and that's basically so that we can build up to it without going into the drip line of the tree. Otherwise we have to maintain a certain grade level from trees coming down, and so by putting in a retaining wall, we can bring this cul-de-sac up to the retaining wall and still stay out of the drip line of the trees. If we go into the drip line of the trees, you'll lose the trees. If you run the caps on any type of the roofs, that tends to kill the trees so that's what we're trying to alleviate there. Want to talk a little bit about. this is a 100 foot setback that's in here, and want to talk about two things. One is with the 100 foot setback we can put a berm across in here and the berm with a 3 to 1 ratio we can get about a 12 foot high berm, and that will be sloped up. Hit 12 feet and then slope back down. We'll plant spruce trees along the top of it and then on both sides, or a majority will be on this side but on both sides we can plant spruce, maple, lindens, those type of things. Ash. And we think that will help out a great deal. We'd like to plant the spruce on the top of it because it offers a great. deal of visibility blockage during the entire season versus just in the summer months, and we think that will help a great deal. The 100 foot setback is basically a code issue that we've complied with here. The water drainage, all of the water in this entire project filters this way and as I explained, a lot of it runs through the ditches because that's a new way of running the water that we haven't tried that. the watershed district would like us to comply with. It all runs this way. The only water that 50 0 0 Planning Commission Meeting —July 19, 2005 would actually go towards these homes would be from the top of that berm going that way. So you could essentially say for approximately 50 feet if the berm was centered through this 100 foot easement, the water from the top of that berm would go towards these homes. There is an outlet pipe that runs from here and runs under and actually runs towards the wetlands to the north. Papke: If I may interrupt at this point, as long as we're on the topic. Ben Merriman: Sure. Papke: My concern was not your development draining into Trotters Ridge but rather the opposite. My concern was let's take the example of Lot 2 here. Lot 2 drains towards your berm. Ben Merriman: It does. Papke: Okay. And where will that water go? Ben Merriman: There's a pipe that runs out here and it actually runs north. Papke: So is there a, is there a storm sewer? How is that water captured and transported to this pipe you're speaking of? I guess I'm not understanding how the water gets out of this low lying area. Ben Merriman: Drainage. It naturally drains to this point or, it's either here. It's right in this area here. It doesn't show up on this plan. And it naturally drains that way currently and then runs that direction. There's no really, to my knowledge there's really no standing water over in this area except in heavy rains and then it slowly runs out of that pipe. We could, and can, if we believe that there may be a problem, take the water around and run it towards our site. So we could put an outlet for this area to run towards our regional pond if it's deemed necessary. Because we certainly don't, by putting a berm in I do not want to increase the amount of water in this area, and we can certainly run a pipe and get it around the berm and take it towards our regional pond here. That wouldn't be a problem. Does that sort of address that? Okay. With respect to building heights, on this particular building what currently I think you have is it 45 feet and 4 stories or how is again? Generous: 4 and 50 is what the IOP district would permit. Ben Merriman: It's what? Generous: 4 stories and 50 feet. Ben Merriman: 50 feet. I think what we would be willing to do is to drop that down to 35 feet for this building, so that this building comes down and has a 35 foot limit. And that would be to the top of the parapet. In other words there's a finish floor elevation and then it goes up and then there's a roof, a flat roof and then the roof actually extends above that and that's called a parapet, 51 r 7 Planning Commission Meeting — July 19, 2005 so it would be at the top of the parapet. So it'd be 35 feet from the ground to the top of the parapet. So we'd be willing to do that on that particular building. McDonald: Excuse me. If you do that on that particular building then you've more or less limited that building to pretty much office space haven't you? Ben Merriman: No. When people start stacking pallets, and this gets to a fire issue so I won't get too in depth into it, but when people start stacking pallets you can basically if you take 3 pallets high, you put on racks and go 3 high. After you go to 4 pallets or 5 pallets high, you get into a fire code issue and then you have to get into in rack sprinkling. Early suppressant fast response systems in order to suppression that. much product in that much area, and so generally. people don't do that. Unless you're going to the distribution facilities that I mentioned before, if you've got a 200,000-300,000 square foot building, then that's exactly what they do. They go 8 racks high. But this one will be limited, this would be basically a building that would have about 3 pallets high or it'd be an 18 foot, 20 foot, 24 foot clear building. Inside. Bob mentioned this as he was going through the presentation. We've got access trees over here on the west side and we're going to take that down to the standard. The city standard. We're going to take those trees plus a lot extras and we'll wind from here across with trees. As many as we can get in, given that in 5 years we have to allow for growth, but within landscaping design standards we'll basically pack this area with trees with the berm. The same thing on this area over here. We'll also line this area with trees and we're going to increase the amount of trees along Galpin Boulevard on the top, on the road side. On the hill side, and so that will act. as an additional visible block from neighbors here. And the same thing for here. Larson: I've got a question for you while we're on the subject of trees. In the woods that it looks like you're going to be taking out the trees. The gray area. Ben Merriman: Here or here? Larson: Yeah. Are any of those trees mature oaks, because I know there's some oaks. Ben Merriman: Yes, some of them are. Larson: Yeah. How many proposed old mature oak trees do you plan on taking out, do you know off hand? Ben Merriman: I don't know exactly how many oaks are in there. I'd have to go to the tree, yeah we've done a tree count and with species so we know exactly how many trees are on here and what type of trees they are, and that's how we get to the calculation for tree replacement and we're actually going to exceed the tree replacement count. And I understand these are large trees, and that's the whole premise of what happened up in here. What's why we went through this process of Outlot C and made this a preservation easement to retain all those trees. We're not able to save all of them. Larson: Okay. 52 Planning Commission Meeting — July 19, 2005 McDonald: Any other questions? Keefe: Can you speak to your sidewalks and where they go throughout the site. Ben Merriman: There's a sidewalk down I believe it's just one side of the cut -de -sac that runs through here. It's not on both sides is it Bob? Generous: I thought there was just one. Ben Merriman: Yeah, it's just on one side. There will be a sidewalk that runs on the cul-de-sac. Keefe: Okay, and then how about up along Galpin, what is the. Generous: Trail on both sides of Galpin currently. Keefe: Okay, and does that tie, go down to Lyman as well or where does it go? I mean does it terminate at Lyman? Generous: I believe so, yes. Eventually Lyman will have a trail system too. When it's upgraded. Keefe: Okay, the future would have a tie in, but it terminates at Lyman. There will be a sidewalk going into this site. A sidewalk along the street that goes into the site, and then all the way up Galpin. Generous: Right. Ben Merriman: That's correct. Keefe: Is there anything on the west side, and I don't even know what's on the west side. Generous: It's an industrial park. Ben Merriman: The west side, the industrial lots back right up to this property. There's a berm that runs across there and that's about it. Keefe: There's no path system... Generous: Not internally, no. On Lyman there will be. Keefe: Yeah, okay. McDonald: Any further questions of the applicant? Ben Merriman: Thank you. F13 Planning Commission Meeting —July 19, 2005 t. McDonald: Okay. Thank you very much Mr. Merriman. With that I will throw the meeting open to public comment and what I would ask is that you come up to the microphone. Address the commission. Give us your name and address as it relates to your interest within this plan and everything. So whoever wants to come up first. And also, as you're doing so, it's 10:00 right now. What I would ask. is that you not repeat the same things over and over again and I would hope that you all would have gotten together and you've got your lists down and thank you very much. LuAnn Sidney: Yes, I should be passing out coffee right now. Chair and Planning Commissioners, my name is LuAnn Sidney and I live at 2431 Bridle Creek Trail, and,I'll put this up here so that can be projected. I live in the Trotters Ridge development and my house is the fifth house on the south side of the neighborhood and I would be directly impacted'by this proposed development. Last Thursday evening a number of neighbors got together and met, about the proposed development and to discuss the staff report. I will be speaking on behalf of the neighbors for a few minutes when I present a request concerning buffering and restrictions to the PUD. First. let me set the stage by showing you an aerial view of the. McDonald: Excuse me ma'am. Would you point out your house on the map? LuAnn Sidney: Oh sure. Right here. First let me set the stage, like I said, to show you this aerial view of the Trotters Ridge. and Stone Creek neighborhoods and the industrial development in Chaska to our west, southwest and southeast. Trotters Ridge and Stone Creek are truly on the edge of residential civilization in Chanhassen and we truly need some relief from the intense industrial development near us in the proposed development we're talking about tonight. This is why we're asking for increased buffering and restrictions to the PUD. We really need a reasonable and satisfactory transition between these vastly different land uses, industrial and residential to maintain the quality of life in our neighborhoods. And I'll point out a few features here on this map. Hope they can hear me. We have Trotters Ridge to the north. And this is Galpin Boulevard. Right in here we have the subject property, and then Stone Creek to the east. Please note the intense, large area of industrial development and I think that really points out the fact that we are really just, well we really need some kind of reasonable transition between these uses. And also as I was listening tonight the commissioners did point out justifiably that we have some very severe traffic concerns too in this area because of all the development in Chaska and we're adding to it with this development as well as the school just south of Stone Creek. So when the neighbors met, as I said we discussed the staff report and we would like to present a request in the form of condition amendments to the development design standards. Hopefully this will be useful to you on the Planning Commission. Be both concise and time saving and obviously I've had experience as a Planning Commissioner and I was hoping that these would help you and you wouldn't have to formulate conditions as you go here when you start discussing them. I'm wondering if you received the revised list today? Everyone. Yes, I believe so. We'll go through here and there should be some highlighted areas. Bolded areas in the conditions that we'll point to this as a revised version of today. In condition 1 of the staff report we'd like to increase, and this will be added to the current condition. Increase spruce, ash, maples and lindens to the east and north side, including Outlot B of the development to exceed buffer yard requirements by 100%. And on the north of buffer yard D, which the developer has selected the 20 foot depth, we'd like 40 feet and more trees at the same intensity., And on the 54 • 0 Planning Commission Meeting — July 19, 2005 east side it's buffer yard D at 15 feet depth and we'd like 30 feet of the same intensity tree plantings in that area. Plantings along Outlot B should be outside the wetland buffer zones, and we noted in the landscape plan, which I don't have marked a sheet whatever, that they had noted that they were planting the buffer zone which is a no no. Okay, condition 3, we'd like to increase the buffer zone around trees and that's to protect the root system of these mature oaks. We have a lot of mature oaks in that area. And I'd like to see and we would all like to see I should say, the people who met, increasing the space between the tree and where any Bobcat might run. Okay, condition 5. Trees should be planted beyond the wetland buffer zones. I know that that needs to be revised from the site plan from the developer. 23, condition 23. If you look on sheet 5 of 13, and you do have a reduction in your packet, ...the retaining wall on the outside line of Building 6 be moved outside of the 100 foot buffer zone on that side. Now maybe Bob would look at that. I wondering if you can pass this around. Okay, so the retaining wall we're concerned about is that this is impacting mature trees, and especially impacting the folks on Lots 1 and 2. So we'd like to have this retaining wall moved so that we can save more trees on that northeast corner and east side of Building 6. And even more down there. Now we talked a bit about. Keefe: How far are you talking about because it's a 100 foot setback and then, so you're talking what? LuAnn Sidney: 200 feet. Yes, we'd like a large buffer there. Especially if we're going to ask for increased plantings, it makes sense that we'd have a larger buffer zone. Okay, 26. We talked about the moving the primary access to Lyman Boulevard. Because of the intense, potentially intense development of this property we'd like to see a secondary safety access road be provided and that could be the Galpin entrance, but that would not be the primary entrance. We'd like to move the primary access to Lyman Boulevard and again it's really a concern about safety and Commissioner Larson mentioned the fact that we're going from a residential street intersection to an industrial street right across the road, and that seems unsuitable. And why not put all the trucks on Lyman? That's what it was built for. And will be expanded to accommodate. And also I received a note from one of the neighbors that there is a current need for marked crosswalks on Galpin. And I guess that's more of a note to staff. 36(h), construction of the rock entrance must be off Lyman, again pointing to Lyman Boulevard as the primary access and all construction traffic shall stay off Galpin. And then 51 we also reiterate the concerns we have about moving the primary access to Lyman Boulevard. When I asked staff a few questions and we did talk about the fact that the plan doesn't show a water surface stub for Lot 6, I guess there's a little bit of juggling of the shared driveways to make it more symmetrical for Lot 5. But I guess what was most concerning to me was learning that potentially what we're talking about in off site grading, we're actually talking about grading to provide the berm... We're showing potentially grading actually into Lots 1 through 4, and I don't think people want that. So I think that really speaks to the fact that we need a larger buffer there and I'm sure a number of the neighbors will be addressing the water issue after me but I need some relief here. There's no reason to encroach onto the property owners back yards to put this berm in, so we need more space. And we do have the new condition 53. And then we also thought of some additional conditions we'd like you to consider recommending. Truly we need 100% screening from the north boundary properties and like I said, we'd like the buffer zone to be increased to at least 200 feet. And that's condition, new condition 54. 55. The applicant shall reduce the square footage 55 Planning Commission Meeting — July 19, 2005 of building 6 to a maximum of 50,000 square feet and provide appropriate articulation using staffs term, especially on the north property boundary. We'd like to see the heights of buildings 5 and 6 not to exceed one story, plus whatever screening or parapet might be there for the roof top equipment. The applicant shall add a minimum 15 foot berm and again landscaping to provide screening for Outlot B on Lots 1 through 4 in Trotters Ridge. This would be a mixture of trees and also the berm along Lots 1 through 4 will have grass and be mowed and maintained. That's what the neighbors who own those properties would like. So not a natural berm but something that would be maintained and have grass. We haven't gotten word about Outlot B. What they would like to see if they want a natural berm or manicured so that will have to be addressed later. 57. That has to do with our property. The silt fence or tree protection fence on the north boundary, we'd like that at least 10 feet away from the drip line of a large oak that we have in our back yard. This tree is a 40 inch diameter white oak with a 60 foot crown and we've been babying it for many years and spending a lot of money on it and I'd like to see tree protection fencing way away from the dripline and also not extend the berm into our lot area but in the berm at Lot.4. 58. 1 added, which is saying, directing the fact that we want a permanent conservation easement. I guess I'm still confused because we have options given in the conditions to condition 53 that it be city owned or private owned. Whatever it is, it should be permanent. Outlot not to be developed. Okay, 59. Keep the retaining wall 10 feet outside the drip line of existing trees on the northeast comer, and I think that whole area needs to be revisited. We have some encroachment on trees and with a little bit of give from the developer we could save more trees if we increase that buffer. And move the retaining walls. 60. Again we'd like a larger buffer. Increase it from 50 feet to 100 feet along the east side of Galpin and add more trees. And I added as I was writing here and this is my contribution here this evening, is that the applicant will conduct a traffic study based on current uses in Chanhassen and similar industrial developments to include the impact of the proposed school and the new Town and Country development because I can see where we're going to have a heck of a lot of a traffic on Galpin as a result of those developments. Plus we already have what we have with Chaska industrial parks. So you have the power as the Planning Commission to recommend to City Council these changes which will help both us and the city. And I'd like you to consider these new conditions. And we also as a neighborhood discussed some other conditions which Bab Generous suggested should really be a part of the development design standards and this sets the tone for ongoing site plan reviews that will be, being brought before you. We'd. like to see the applicant limit the hours of operation of any business from 7:00 to 6:00 p.m. and that would be changing in the staff report under the development design standards the permitted uses. And also under that same section, business type shall not include conference, convention centers, hotels, motels, or research labs. Now the reason for research labs is we have enough odors and fan noise already. We don't need any more so anything that would contribute to that, please you know make that a use that's not permitted. Also the applicant shall not permit outdoor storage of any kind. We'd like that as part of the prohibitive, and I created a new section ancillary uses. That's an eyesore and it really will be detracting from the views from our neighborhood. Businesses shall not have outdoor paging systems. Again another prohibitive use. We're dealing with that already from Chaska. The applicant shall provide for additional sounding proofing materials in Building 5 and 6. That can be added into any building materials and design. And also the light level for site lighting shall be zero. Not one-half. Zero foot candles at the north property line. That's under H(4), lighting. And really the light pollution is really severe from Chaska. Just no lights if we can, I'd love that, no lights in the development but at least no lights. 56 • Planning Commission Meeting — July 19, 2005 I don't think that that would go over but at least no, we can minimize the light pollution at the property line, and also no lighted signs, either externally or internally lighted will be permitted, and you can add that into the signage part. Also another personal note, under E. Building Material and Design. E(5). Concrete shall be finished in stone or textured. I just really have a, I don't know, I do not want to see painted concrete buildings anymore. It just doesn't do a thing for me and I don't want to look out from my back yard and see that as well. So anyone I thought I'd end with that. Maybe just read a comment from our meeting and we came up with kind of our statement concerning this development. The Trotters Ridge development requests special consideration and a reasonable transition between the residential industrial areas due to the fact that we are being made an island of residential within a sea of industrial development, which is truly true after you look at that aerial view. Residents chose to live in this area for the natural beauty in the area provided by mature growth of trees and safety of the area for our children. So be happy to answer any questions if you have any. McDonald: No questions. Who'd like to speak next? Thank you very much for coming up. Go ahead. If you could just state your name and where you live. Mike Krych: Yes Mr. Chair. Chairman and members of the commission. My name is Mike Krych. I live at 2127 Boulder Road in the Stone Creek neighborhood. I just wanted to add a few things that she had mentioned from prior to me but a couple things I did sit through a good portion of this meeting and I was encouraged to hear the discussion regarding planning, zoning and land use as it related to the other developments that you were looking at east of Audubon and south of Lyman, and specifically as that related this idea of blending. And I think that's very important component as it relates to this specific development that's being proposed here as well. As you drive along Galpin from Highway 5 down to Lyman it's essentially all single family housing there with the exception of some multifamily housing on the west side of Galpin up towards Highway 5, and then there's the Bluff Creek Elementary School. And that is there when you get down to Lyman, there's some natural breaks. I guess in terms of the land use, I don't see this particular parcel falling into that concept of blending and I would have a slightly different term for it in that what we've got here is several neighborhoods that do have some connectivity and I think that's very important here. That we maintain a sense of continuity and connectivity between neighborhoods. And this, by introducing this specific type of development being industrial use, it doesn't provide that sense of blending or connectivity. Again if you look at the aerial maps of the city, again south of Lyman that's I think obviously natural break from going from residential to actually the industrial south. There's much development along those lines anyways. I think the other natural break is at where the wetlands occur on the west side of this proposed lot. In terms of the natural break from the industrial uses to the west, versus as you travel east towards the intersection at Galpin, that is a dramatic change and again you're entering into a neighborhood that's very much residential. I would like you to just consider that intensely as you look at this and review this. Our neighborhood, Stone Creek we put together some issues that I'm not going to go through. I think you probably have a copy of it. It was again issues regarding proposed development and there are some city planning zoning issues as well, but I wanted to just make a couple of comments regarding that and it had to do with good design and providing quality solutions as they relate to land use, aesthetics, safety and function. I think we've talked quite a bit. You have brought up a number of those points as well so, but in terms of land use, there needs to be an appropriateness of the contacts in the surroundings, you know 57 a Planning Commission Meeting -- July 19, 2005 x professional service types of buildings. Might be okay. I guess I'm looking at this realistically that something's going to happen there. So I'd like to make sure that that quality of the project and the design of that hits on all these points that the previous speaker was talking about. Just one quick thing regarding aesthetics with industrial buildings. I would actually like to propose an amendment as well that speaks to the materials and character of the architecture. That it sticks with (a), quality materials. Not secondary types of materials and I view rock face block or painted block, you know colored block, that's all concrete block no matter which way you slice it. And I think it's a distant second cousin to the materials such as brick, stucco, architectural pre -cast, even metal if it's used in the right way. So, and then I guess I have a couple of specific questions. I'm not looking for answers but one has to do with the retaining wall as proposed in the middle of the site. I think on the south edge of Outlot C, well can I ask. What is the height of that wall? Okay. As soon as you exceed a height of 4 feet or so, then it has to bvengineered and typically often times has to have tie backs into the landscaping so you're not only, you're not just building a wall at that point necessarily. If you have to have tie backs, it does affect the grade beyond where the wall is which could possibly mean going into the tree line, into the drip line and affecting the trees that are there so even though I respect the idea of trying to protect the trees that are there, I ask. that it, we be careful in terms of how it's engineered so that it actually serves it's purpose. And I guess with that. I. guess that's all 'I have for tonight so thank you for listening. .McDonald: Thank you very much. ,Next. Ma'am. Christine Fischer: Hi, I'm Christine Fischer. Sorry, wake up everybody. I'm at 2407 Bridle Creek Trail and I just, I'm going to be very brief. LuAnn articulately represented my neighbors and I in her comments to us but 2407 is Lot 2 and so we are directly impacted by this and just a couple comments on the building height. I encourage you to seriously, I'm one who's requesting the one story height on this because I'm looking out my windows at, I don't want to be seeing the Great Wall of China as I'm looking out, so that will definitely impact us directly. Another comment on the water. The developer indicated that he wasn't aware that there was any standing water issues. But that is our lot that, Lot 2 and the drainage pipe that he's referring to is there and after a significant rain we do have standing water back there for a while, so there is a drainage issue there. At this point. And then one other comment that I want to make is about the safety issue and we talk about the roadway and to the traffic, the.increased traffic, and I just want to make a comment again referring to our neighborhood being in this kind of, this little island by itself. There are no lighted crosswalks for our kids to get across the road to go to Bluff Creek, to go to a park. If they go up to the light at Highway S, there's a sign that says no crossing to cross the street there. There is not alighted, so in terms of safety, there isn't a lighted crosswalk for them and so just increasing the traffic at this point, and we've only got the painted on crosswalks which you know how effective those are. So those are a couple kind of real specific to our lot and our situation that I wanted to share with you. So thank you. McDonald: Thank you. Next ma'am. Sarah Dale: Hi. Sarah Dale, 2487 Bridle Creek Trail. Our lot. is adjacent to lot, to the number 1 that looks out on Outlot B. In the back of Trotters Ridge. And. our concern is that we backup to D.S. Brown, an 80,000 square foot warehouse, industrial site that makes a lot of noise. Has a lot • 0 Planning Commission Meeting —July 19, 2005 of lights and we are now going to be surrounded by a lot of noise, a lot of lights if we have two industrial complexes on either side of us. It clearly is a very intense, dense development they are proposing for this site. Building number 6, the front is approximately the same size as the D.S. Brown building. Square footage wise. In Chaska and that is a huge building. 5, which would be our view to the south of our lot, over the wetland which has no trees, has only grass, would be the back wall of Lot 5 and I really do not want a Great Wall of China everywhere I look out my bedroom and back doors. I just don't think that is fair to the residences of Trotters Ridge. Thank you. McDonald: Thank you. Next. Ron Blum: My name is Ron Blum. I'm at 2081 Stone Creek Drive. I just have a couple of comments to make regarding what I think the implied use of these buildings might be. As I look at this preliminary plat, it looks like these are set up for multi tenant uses. Most of the back of these buildings to me indicate that there's a dock door, as many as 5 to 7 dock doors per building. And not knowing the developers, or I should say from the developer's standpoint, he probably doesn't know exactly the use of these buildings yet as I think was earlier stated but I think there's a high potential for not only the 2,600 vehicle traffic but also numerous larger truck type deliveries and will calls that the developer didn't think are going to happen. Just the indication that the multiple back doors on all these buildings are susceptible to multi tenant rather than single tenant use. You're going to have as much as I calculated, if all these dock doors are used on a regular basis, you know close to 600 deliveries or will calls per day. So the, that all plays into with the traffic items that were brought up earlier. The noise obviously is an issue. The comment that the developer made as far as the building heights and the early suppression fire systems. More and more companies that, I should say more and more building owners are going to the ESFR type sprinkler systems for the resale value of their building, not knowing the tenant use or the purchaser of that building down the road. They are putting in these ESFR systems so that they can better have, have better resale for their buildings so they are spending the money up front and the ESFR system allows them to pretty much bring in any type of tenant for high piled storage as he's referred to earlier. So I think the trend is going more and more to future use of these buildings and I hope you keep that in mind as you look at this long term use of these buildings because there are some things that should be considered. Obviously a lot of them are, some of them are visual. Not a lot of the comments that were made that I have a concern with for on the east side of the development areas as far as the buffer. Not knowing the street elevation. The building pad elevations and the height of the buildings that are being allowed by city ordinances. I'll have to do a little more homework on that but I have a concern for height of building and how the east side is buffered as well as the north side as it relates to the Stone Creek development. Lighting is an issue. It's already been brought up. The tree preservation that the developer spoke to earlier. Again is addressing and probably benefiting his buildings from an aesthetics standpoint and also buffering the north development but speaks very little to the east side buffer, not knowing what berm elevations are again so I probably need to do a little more homework with getting the plan in front of you and the elevations and such too. But most importantly I think the traffic issue has been noted numerous times but I don't know if the 2,600 number that was mentioned earlier plays into the high potential for truck traffic, and it's going to be not panel truck. It's going to be semi traffic. I can guarantee you that because I have a little experience with knowledge in these buildings and these buildings are being set up for 59 Planning Commission Meeting — July 19, 2005 high truck traffic by the indication of the multiple back doors on the buildings as the plan shows. Thank you. McDonald: Thank you. Next. Drew Dingman: Good evening. My name is Drew Dingman. I live at 2403 Bridle Creek Trail which is Lot I in Trotters Ridge. Directly impacted primarily by Building 6, which is the topic I'd like to discuss briefly tonight. The comment that was made to me last. week at the open house at the rec center was that a lot of thought was put into the design of buildings 2, 3, 7 and 8, as well as 1 and 2 staggered the loading zone and such to provide screening, and I was impressed by that consideration. That stands in my opinion in stark contrast to the design of building 6 with it's very long straight edges against both Trotters Ridge and Stone Creek. It'slhard to not take it personally. It's a very dramatic, here's the building and I struggle with that. Both in our neighborhood as well as at Stone Creek. If you look at the, I'm not sure what's available visually but if you look at this design here, there's a great deal of pre-existing brush and trees along this entire, or where the parking lot is designed to be. I guess I ask the commission to consider requesting that building 6 be redesigned in the spirit of building say 3 or 7 such that it's a much smaller footprint. It also provides a much smaller front edge to both neighborhoods. It would allow the parking lot that currently is providing a terrible view to the Stone Creek neighborhood, would allow that to move back to the south or even to the west, tucked in. And it would also limit those straight edges that I think are unsightly and are creating a lot of the angst and a lot of the discussion about buffers here tonight. My second request would be that, not to reopen the whole access road issue, but real briefly I would ask that the commission either contact the county on our behalf and just ask that a modicum of logic be used. I think the comments that were related here earlier I would echo those completely that the intersection of residential and industrial is really not logical. The gentleman from Stone Creek mentioned flow and Galpin from north to south is very residential. Lyman from east to west is very industrial. It makes much more sense for the industrial access to be on Lyman simply from a flow perspective as ... from an aesthetic perspective so thank you for your consideration. McDonald: Thank you. Anyone else? Yes sir. Roger Schmidt: My name is Roger Schmidt and I live at 8301 Galpin Boulevard. That would be the property right across the street from Trotters Ridge. East across Galpin from Trotters Ridge, and actually most everything that I had concern about was addressed tonight but and I just want to reissue, or reiterate what the last gentleman said too that Galpin Boulevard is essentially, as far as traffic goes, is essentially residential and Lyman is commercial so it just doesn't make sense but I: think staff can tell you this, but I'll pass it on too so make sure you know but when you come to Galpin Boulevard, there's school bus stops on that road now. From a safety standpoint. As far as I know, I don't know of any on Lyman. There's, if you're coming from the north on Galpin to the turn off going to this development, you're coming over a pretty good sized grade and the traffic on Galpin is I think a 45 miles per hour speed limit. But there is a lot of it going a Iittle faster than that so I think that there's a safety issue as you come over this grade where you turn, make your right hand turn into this development. And I think, well as far as on Lyman Boulevard, I think that's due for an upgrade if I, I think I've heard that and so if it's, if it isn't set up now to handle that kind of traffic, I would think when they upgrade it they should be able to o Planning Commission Meeting — July 19, 2005 get it to the point where you could put the entrance off of Lyman instead of Galpin. And the only other thing I'll say about traffic is that when I pull out of my driveway now and turn north to go up 5 and I've got a little hill behind me, people come from the south and if I turn up here and by the time I get up to my 45 mile per hour speed, you know I've probably -got like 2 or 3 people right on my tail already so these people are coming in a lot faster than probably what the speed limit is, so. Okay, then LuAnn mentioned about hours of operation within the development and I don't know what, if the city has any standards but how about hours of operation for the construction part of this. You know for re -grading. Putting up the buildings and stuff like this, I would think that too that there should be some kind of limits put on the operation there. Probably very similar to what they do for you know what she proposed for the use of the buildings after they've been put up. And sitting there I was wondering, there's an awful lot of screening going on here with berms and trees, and I'm wondering who is responsible for keeping that up once it's in place. In other words, you know we had a hot spell. Getting up there and watering the trees. Is that the developers you know, and perpetually. I mean not only for the first year or second year or third or fourth year. Who does it? The city? The developer? Or it certainly can't be the residents around it or people who own those lots, so there's got to be some, you know some kind of control of maintaining that and if trees die, replace them. Or if trees die as a result of construction, you know getting too close to roots and stuff like that. I think there should be something put into the plan that those get replaced property too and so on. That's all I have. Okay, thank you. McDonald: Thank you. Anyone else? Sir. Jim Leonard: I'll keep it brief because I've been here since 7:00 waiting for a chance to talk. I know everybody wants to go home. My name's Jim Leonard. I live at 2360 Stone Creek Drive. Second house I on the left. Okay, so this directly impacts me quite a bit. Just recently moved to Chanhassen. Purchased the house back in March. Chose Chanhassen as a place that I wanted to live. Ended up in Carver County. Okay. So my loyalties are with the city as we're talking about this. There's two points that I really have concern about. One I'll address to the developer. Those trees in the southeast corner, you're taking out too many. You need to do something to save some more of those trees that are over there. We've talked about all the other areas. My neighbors from the other, from Trotters Ridge and our neighborhood, we talked about the rest of it. I trust you as our chosen representatives will make the right decisions to protect the things that need to be protected, but let's look at those trees in the southeast corner. Secondly, we need to get this thing exited out onto Lyman. I mean Galpin is just the wrong place for that. There's too many kids in the neighborhoods. There's way too much stuff there, like I said. I chose to live in Chanhassen. I live in Carver County as a result of that. If it's a dispute with the County we've got to figure out how to handle this. I know we need to co -exist but we need to handle this and have it exit out into the right place. I'm all in favor of economic development. I understand the needs for these things but we've got to make sure that makes sense for the community. Thank you very much. McDonald: Thank you. Next. JoEllen Radermacher: Good evening. My name is JoEllen Radermacher. I live at 2479 Bridle Creek Trail. I'm number i 1 on the plan. I look right out onto Outlot B and it is a wildlife 61 Planning Commission Meeting —July 19, 2005 preserve area. I do ask you to take into consideration the setbacks that we have requested -and the berm requirements that we have requested. There's a multitude of wildlife back there and when I Iook out my kitchen window or I sit on my deck, right now we have a beautiful view out there and I hate to think of looking out there and seeing a building out there. And without a berm or some kind of control, that's exactly what we would see. We have, as I mentioned previously, we have a multitude of wildlife out there which includes, we have deer, pheasant, ducks, including wood ducks, even the pileated woodpeckers, and of course the others, raccoons and everything else too. But we all as a neighborhood have come to enjoy them and talk about them frequently. I hope you take into consideration the impact of all of this on our wildlife and also on our views that we see. Thank you. McDonald: Thank you. Next. a�» Sara Morlock: Good evening. My name is Sara Morlock. I live at 2325 Boulder Road, and I'll show you... My lot is this one right here. So we too are directly impacted by the proposed development across the street, basically in our back yard. The picture I passed out to you shows you the existing trees today and as you can see what they are proposing keeping is minimal. And they'll replace it with 2 1/a inch saplings which isn't going to provide any kind of decent screening for our back yards, and these are our back yards. So I really ask that you thoughtfully consider your decision making regarding this, the proposed development. Thank you. McDonald: Thank you. Next. Peggy Emerson: Hi. I'm Peggy Emerson from 8409 Stone Creek Court and I'm on a committee at Bluff Creek Elementary and I just happened to see the long term plan for the school. That will either be a middle school or a high school within,.I think it was 5 or 8 years and I could be totally wrong on that. But I know that one thing that they were planning on was having a bridge for children, pedestrians to go over the train tracks, so that would make all those kids you know go up Galpin and. Aanenson: There's a railroad trestle underneath the tracks already. Peggy Emerson: No, on .Lyman. You know there's a train that goes right across Lyman. Aanenson: Yeah, there's a track, the trestle that goes underneath. Peggy Emerson: So the school you know would be down Lyman. A bridge going along side Lyman that will cross, let the children cross over the. Aanenson: We're still looking at trying to do something underneath too. Peggy Emerson: Oh, okay. Aanenson: Yeah, we're working with Steve Pumper on that too to go underneath. There's some grade issues there. 62 • 0 Planning Commission Meeting — July 19, 2005 Peggy Emerson: Okay, but then this goes to the traffic issue. I mean if you have semi's turning that comer right and going up north on Galpin, I'm thinking it'd still be a problem with all the children traffic, and especially with Lifetime Fitness, you know maybe the over 12 year old kids, you know that can go there by themselves, they can ride their bike over or whatever and then there's going to be the crossing Galpin problem. Thank you. McDonald: Thank you. Next. Okay, no more comments? Okay. Then the public meeting is closed and at this point I will bring it back up to the commissioners for comments. And start with Debbie. Or would did rather I go to the other end? Larson: No, that's alright. I'm getting punchy. It's almost 11:00. As this sits, I'm not comfortable with it. I know there's a lot of thought that has gone into trying to preserve trees but I think not enough thought was put into the neighborhoods that surround this. The traffic. The streets and I tend to disagree with the county that this is the best exit for this particular subdivision going into a residential area. I really strongly oppose that and as it stands right now I don't think I can go along with this. That's all I have to say. McDonald: Okay. Dan. Keefe: Yeah, I have a question of staff. Follow-up question. In regards to the access to Lyman, you know one of the things I'm thinking is Chaska's business park, which is directly west of this empties onto Lyman. They've got a big access onto Lyman, and the county has allowed them to have access of a commercial industrial facility onto Lyman. And I wonder why they wouldn't allow Chanhassen to also have an access onto Lyman for it's commercial industrial use, and maybe they don't want more commercial industrial use on Lyman. Even if they go to upgrade Lyman to four lanes, they're still going to have to accommodate Chaska's business park of all the trucks and traffic which is going in and out of that, you know that. I mean there's a lot more industrial and commercial there than is going to be in this park. So I don't know what we can do to press the issue. I don't know if we press it all the way or you know ended up berm, or I don't know. It's just an area where I feel fuzzy for me. I guess what I'd say is I'm not in support of pushing all this traffic out onto Galpin, and I live right next door to that development in Chaska and I see them push all their traffic out there, I think they ought to be able to accommodate the amount of traffic out of here onto Lyman like they do out of that park. In regards to, so in regards to the road I guess I would want to see a revisit on that. The, and just one more statement on that. It would be, you know I agree with the residents in regards to, I don't think it's the industrial residential mix in regards to traffic going out onto Galpin really makes sense, just especially given in light of the neighboring property just to the west. Neighboring development to the west. In regards to, I would potentially be in support of this development this evening in regards to, if we could revisit the road and then what I'd like to do is to look at a number of different things in regards to berming and buildings. One, I would be in support of a, if we limited Outlot 6 to something less than 35 feet. I think it would be either a 1 or a 2, possibly a 2 story on Outlot 6. I'm thinking something in the line of, I don't know what the building is, 12 feet? Is that what we're looking per story. Plus a 4 foot parapet. Is that kind of what it is? So you'd be 16 feet or 28 feet. I think probably 16 feet. And then, and I would like to see the berm increased and I would like to accommodate what the residents have proposed on that one which would be a 15 foot berm which I think pushes the setback to 125 feet versus 100 63 Planning Commission Meetang -- July 19, 2005 feet on the north side. I would like to see the, one other. I'd like to increase, you talked about increasing the number of trees on Outlot 5. Or not outlot 5 but Lot 5. And maybe you have a better feel for that in terms of the number of trees but there's reasonable screening on that given the, it looks like it's an over 200 foot setback to the building, or it looks like it's over 200 .feet from the lot line to the building with appropriate screening there we might be alright. And then I would like to see more trees saved on the east side. So those are my comments at this point. McDonald: Okay. Deborah. Zorn: My overall impression of this proposal is, it's quite difficult for me to find the blend, as many people have discussed this evening. Iu particular, the access point. If we were to work through an access point, that would make much more sense off Galpin as I'm a resident on north of Highway 5 Galpin so .I can feel what the residents are expressing this evening. There is a concern with the Galpin entrance. 'If we were to work through a Lyman access point, my concern then would be maintaining the integrity of the trees along the boulder walls. A lot of the comments that have been made this evening. Something that hasn't been discussed as much but simply sound proofing and having that be a great part of the purpose of the berms and how to do that. The size of building 6 and I would agree with Dan's comments on the 16 foot proposal. And again the walking paths, lighted paths. All aspects related to that. I think those are my main concerns moving forward with this proposal and I guess encouraging the developer to rethinking maybe the best use of that building 6 lot and how he can, or my standpoint I think a residents is to make that much smaller, which I guess makes that a little less desirable to develop but that greatly impacts the amount of trucks and other traffic that would be coming through as that is the largest I believe building on the site. Moving towards building 7 or building 3, that's been mentioned this evening..I think that's maybe what would mirror the rest of the proposal and so I really think Lot 6 or building 6 right now just doesn't make much sense to me. So that's it for now. McDonald: Okay. Kurt. Papke: I think I'm going to be a little bit of.a contrarian tonight. Several of the residents have pointed out both audibly and in writing that they feel that for instance Trotters Ridge is a bit of an island of residential within an industrial office park. To me it seems, it feels more like a fault line. Okay, we've got the residential continental plate meeting up with the industrial office continental plate and we're getting the Rocky Mountains kind. of erupting between the two. And I think a lot of our issues come around to the fact that there's no transitioning here. I mean it's just you know very nice homes to boom, office park and unfortunately you already have that. You already have that abutting up to the Chaska office park so it's, this is just intensifying an issue that I. think already exists. I think where my contrarian views are going to come into play is, I feel very strongly that we're going to have to connect to Galpin. You know we can debate whether an industrial office park meeting up with Stone Creek Drive on Galpin right there is a good thing or not but I think ultimately when this parcel gets developed, that's where it's going to have to come in. You know from what we've seen of the other developments that have come through, I just don't see Carver County you know letting us put another outlet onto Lyman. I just,.I think Chaska gets away with it because they meet the list. They're more than 1,000 feet or quarter mule what it is apart. That's why they do it because they have the spacing and this one, 64 Planning Commission Meeting -- July 19, 2005 we either rip up a wetland or we come out onto Galpin, so you know I don't see a way out of that impasse. Keefe: Except the Galpin entrance is not in conformance with the county guidelines as well. Papke: No, Galpin is okay. I beg your problem? The north/south connection is too close or what's the issue? Keefe: From Lyman to the entrance it's not long enough already anyway. So that one's not... McDonald: We will defer to city engineer on this. Morris: For clarification, the quarter mile spacing is the city's guideline in the city code. And that's correct, the one on Galpin doesn't meet the quarter mile access but the city code also stipulates that access onto an arterial street such as Galpin should be made at an existing cross road which the existing cross road would be Stone Creek Drive. Papke: Okay. Another thing to consider is that the Chaska residents, or the residents of Stone Creek and Trotters Ridge and also along Galpin are also going to use Lyman so they're, you know some percentage of the time so they're going to have to cope with whatever additional intersection comes out to Galpin. And in terms of butting up industrial office with residential, I believe we have some similar situations up on Audubon inbetween 5 and Lyman where we have residential on the east side. We have industrial office on the west side. Aanenson: Yes. We also have it off of Dell Road up against Eden Prairie. Papke: Right. So we do have several precedents for this occurring and are we aware of any safety issues surrounding that at this point? Aanenson: No, but I would like to, as long as you opened up that topic. And the issue came up of who's going to maintain. On the Eden Prairie side, those neighbors actually worked to increase the buffer. Provided land. They maintain their side. It's difficult, there's something we need to be honest and discuss. It's difficult for a developer to go on somebody else's property to try to maintain it. That is going to be a problem. So what we've worked on on those is the property owners manage their own, especially when you're negotiating because this is a PUD and it got loaded up. The developer could come in and do a straight subdivision and if it didn't meet any ordinance, you'd be compelled to approve it. So now we ask them to do a PUD. Now we've gone kind of way over on the other side and somewhere we need to find kind of that, because if we're going to go 125 feet, then someone needs to take responsibility. The person that buys that business, they're responsible for sprinkling that, which we would require because otherwise it's not going to live. Especially when we're on that tall. Somebody needs to take responsibility for the other side. Papke: I have a question about that setback. The Chanhassen City Code here, if I read it, we've got, correctly for IOP we've got a minimum setback of 50 feet when it abuts a residential district. And then we have 100 foot buffer yard required when the interface occurs on internal lot lines. C'1 Planning Commission Meeting July 19, 2005 And the next paragraph says the buffer yard is an additional setback. It is to be cumulatively calculated with required setbacks outlined above. Now that sounds to me like 150 foot setback, if I read it. Or am I reading it wrong? Aanenson: We have not interpreted it that way. Papke: Cumulative says add them up. Aanenson: Correct, but the two other examples I gave you are not 150 feet. Papke: So, but you know the way I read it, I would interpret this situation as 150 the way I read the code. I mean, you know. For IOP so you know I would be supportive of 150 foot setback on that line if that's, you know we're the Planning Commission. If that's how we readthe city code, we either got to change the code or we've got to lay it down that way. Couple. other issues. On the wetland areas, .I'm not real in favor of berming along the edges of that. You know water quality, the wetland person isn't here tonight but I suspect their opinion wouldn't be real favorable with putting a big berm right next to a wetland there. I mean that would, I imagine that would really mess with the drainage. along that wetlands so you know a couple trees or something like that might work. Oh let's see. I think I'd be in favor of somewhat more limiting the uses in here. I think the residents pointed out, I think motels/hotels would be a very poor use of this area. It doesn't look like that's what's being suggested but I don't have any issue with eliminating that. I think we've done a good job of keeping those sorts of things along Highway 5 and I think that's a good thing. I'd also like to take out contractor's yards because those are notorious noise makers and early, you know early morning noise makers. I think if we have 150 foot setback on Lot 6 and we do, the developers sound very amenable to doing very intensive landscaping and given that additional size we might be able to get a berm to the point where from ground level you can't see the roof line anymore so I think if we had a condition like that in here, you know.I think that'd be reasonably, reasonably palatable. Keefe: At 35 feet? Papke: Yeah: So I guess I'm not as pessimistic about this proposal as perhaps my fellow commissioners. I really think. the developer did a great job here with Outlot C. I mean that's, for a commercial development to come in with that kind of a dedication and buffer zone and tree conservation, you know the alternative could be a lot worst here. Okay, so I think we've got to be realistic that if we deny this proposal and City Council denies this proposal, the next time you're in here, you're going to have a lot longer faces potentially, okay. So do keep that in mind. Aanenson: Commissioner Papke, can I just ask a question? Papke: Yeah. Aanenson: Mr. Mayer who owns the property right now has a contractor's yard. That is one of the desired owners right now so obviously that. 66 Planning Commission Meeting —July 19, 2005 Papke: That ain't going to fly. Aanenson: It's in the southeast corner and...so I just, he is one of the owners. I just need to... Papke: Well okay. You know if it won't fly, it won't fly. Aanenson: I just want to point that out for the record. Papke: No, I'm glad you brought that up. That could obviously be an issue for that. That's all I have to say. Aanenson: Yeah, that's his business there right now. McDonald: Does anyone else want to add to their comments or anything? Well, I'm not sure quite where to start either. If we adopt the proposals that have been put in here, I don't think this becomes developable land. You squeezed it down to where there's nothing left. I tend to agree. I've been out to the site and looked at it. I can't see how what's there right now is better than what's being proposed, and I do look at, I understand about the buffering between residential and industrial. We'll have to tell you about that one but yes, the land will be developed and you may not like what goes in there on the next go around. I think that we should jump on the offer of limiting building 6 to 35 feet. If we can do some things as far as the berming, we can minimize any of the impact there as far as the views of the neighbors and try to mitigate that as much as possible. The other issues, I'll go along with what the commission wants but it seems as though if we put too many restrictions on this it's just going to stay what it is and I don't know what he's going to turn into from that standpoint but I mean you go out there and you've got rolls of tar laying around. You've got gravel pits. You've got all kinds of stuff, and what they're, especially the area there to the northeast is, it's not high quality wetlands I would say. So, and the whole issue about Galpin versus Lyman. Okay, if we put the exit on Lyman, the only time anybody's going to be going up Galpin is to get to 5. They're still going to be going up Galpin Avenue. Most of the turns are going to be down to Lyman, which are to the south, which are away from the residential areas. These are county arterial roads. They do not differentiate between residential or commercial. They're arterial roads and we have no control over that. We have been through this before about exits onto highways. We went through it with the State about 41 because of, oh the farm. I forget the name of it now. Larson: Yoberry. McDonald: Yeah, we went through it there. You're not going to get these, you're not going to get that changed. They have done studies. They've got rules. They've got regulations and they do not bend. We've already been through this on a number of different projects. Well it's the county too. I mean they follow the same thing. So I mean I'm in favor of some of these restrictions. Others I have to tell ya, if you start restricting hours, I don't know who's going to be able to go in there and do a business. We have to be realistic. These are businesses. People will go in there to make money. Yes, they can't be hotels. They can't be anybody that generates loud music, stamping plants or anything such as that. You should get good neighbors and I think 67 Planning Commission Meeting— July 19, 2005 you're entitled to that and part of the restrictions that we've put on here about who's going to go in should help to ensure you get some of that. Yes. Papke: A comment about hours. Something else for surrounding homeowners to consider. If we restrict hours, that intensifies the traffic flow during rush hour, okay by not allowing a second or third shift. That means everybody goes in at 7:00 or 8:00 and everybody comes out at 5:00, and so you know, yes. There will be a little bit more noise at night but it also makes the traffic problem worst so you're kind of trading off one problem for another. McDonald: And I guess the other thing, the question I was asking about a traffic light. I mean that's one of the things that. Someone want to make a comment? ra Audience: I just, I guess if you're going to have the possibility of being able to have three shifts... wouldn't you have three different, you know you could possibly have 300%amore employees going there. Logically that would be the next step so. McDonald: One of the things that I wanted to get back to was a traffic light there.and I would hope that. the city will follow up and we will push, if it's required, we will look at putting one in there. That will also help the issue there. Otherwise yeah, we're going to create a big problem come 5:00 and 7:00 with everybody in the world trying to come in and out of there. And I guess that's it. I mean at this point I'll throw it open for a motion from the commissioners. Audience: If people have a question... McDonald: No, the public meeting is over. Papke: Okay. I'll attempt to stumble through this one. Okay, I make a motion that we recommend rezoning of the property located"within the Chanhassen West Business Park from Agricultural Estate, A2 to Planned Unit Development, PUD incorporating the development design standards contained within the staff report. based upon the findings of fact attached to the report. Second motion, the Chanhassen Planning Commission, I recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat for Chanhassen West Business Park, plans prepared by Schoell and Madsen dated June 17, 2005 based on the findings of fact attached to the report and subject to the following conditions, 1 through 53, with your additional one Bob. Is that correct? Generous: That's 1 through 53. Papke: 1 through 53. I'd like to add condition number 54. That in the northeast corner abutting Lot 6, that we follow the city code and have 150 foot setback. Condition 55. We restrict use for no motels/hotels. Condition 56. The combination of the berm height and landscaping and the height of the building on Lot 6 be such that you cannot see the roof line while standing on the ground on Lot number 2 of Trotters Ridge. And condition number 57. We resolve, they work with city staff to resolve any drainage issues with Lot number 2 in Trotters Ridge. Then motion C. I recommend approval of the wetland alteration. Keefe: Can we do an additional amendments? • s Planning Commission Meeting -- July 19, 2005 Papke: Why don't you let me finish then you can toss in your friendlies. I recommend approval of the wetland alteration permit to fill and alter wetlands within the development, plans prepared by Schoell and Madsen Inc. dated June 17, 2005 subject to conditions 1 through 10. And at that point I'll entertain friendly amendments. Keefe: Friendly amendment to B. Increase the tree preservation or landscaping on the east side. Of the development. Papke: To what? It has to be somehow. Keefe: Yeah, right. Papke: Objective. Keefe: I'm trying to, what do we say right now in terms of that? Papke: Did you want to increase it by some percentage beyond the proposed landscape plan as given on the drawing? There is a drawing. I think it's what, drawing 6 or something like that, that has, that shows all the landscape plans. Keefe: The east property line. Well at least bring it up to the required amount. Is that already in here? Papke: Yeah, I think that's. Keefe: Is there a recommendation in here to bring it? Papke: Yeah, I think it was in there. Yeah, it's number 1. Did you want to go beyond minimum somehow or what are you proposing? Keefe: Well, the question is whether the minimum would meet what we want it to do. McDonald: Well, can I ask a question of city staff on this. I mean we've been through this before with trees. We have a forester within the city. Aren't there limits as far as the density of trees that we look at? Generous: For replanting. New plantings, yes. McDonald: Right, and as a part of any project, isn't that part of the process as far as going in there? Generous: Yes. You would review the landscape plan that looks at the viability of the trees over a long period. 69 Planning Commission Meeting `July 19, 2005 McDonald: Okay. And should also look. to make sure that. it meets city code as far as spacings, quantity, density and those types of things. Generous: Yes. McDonald: Then I'd say it's in there. Aanenson: Let me just add one other thing. Just for clarification, for everybody's edification actually. Each one of these projects again has to come back through site plan so you will get another chance to address screening, buffering, additional landscaping with each plan. Not to say you don't want to add something more but just to make sure that everybody understands that. Papke: Sure, sure. Keefe: Alright, then I'll retract that amendment. But let me take a run at another one. Which would be to address the access to Lyman with Carver County again. McDonald: I'm not sure we can do that. That's a condition we're putting on there we have no control over. I mean we've been through this before with 41 and again that comes down to, those were interagency. Papke: Well we can request city staff I would think to revisit it with Carver County engineering. Aanenson: Sure. Papke: You know we all understand what the likely outcome is going to be but we can certainly ask the City Engineer to please revisit this, given the consideration and the fault Iine that we're creating here. Okay, I accept that amendment. McDonald: And then did we say anything about the building height on building 6? Papke: The condition I put in was a combination of berming, landscaping and limitation of the height must be such that from ground level on Lot 2 you cannot see the roof line. McDonald: Okay. So it could be less than 35 feet. Papke: Could be less. It depends upon how, my preference in these kinds of situations is to, is to specify the outcome to the developer and then let the developer trade off berming and landscaping versus building height. Larson: What about buffering on building 5? McDonald: Are you proposing an amendment? Larson: Do I have to? 70 11 Planning Commission Meeting — July 19, 2005 McDonald: Well again, all of this is covered by... Larson: Okay, never mind. Alright. McDonald: Trees and those things. Keefe: And then they're coming back for each one. McDonald: And then again, each one is... Okay, so it looks like we will accept amendments, or conditions 1 through 53 and then we have added 54 through 58. Okay. Do I hear a second? Keefe: I'll second that. McDonald: And I have a second. Papke moved, Keefe seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the ordinance rezoning the property located within the Chanhassen West Business Park from Agricultural Estate District (A-2) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) incorporating the development design standards contained within this staff report based on the findings of fact attached to the report. All voted in favor, except Zorn and Larson who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 2. " "Papke moved, Keefe seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat for Chanhassen West Business Park, plans prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc., dated June 17, 2005, based on the findings of fact attached to the report and subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant shall increase landscape plantings in the south and east property line bufferyards to meet minimum requirements. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted before final approval. 2. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to any construction activities. Fencing shall remain in place until construction is completed. 3. All trees shown as preserved on plans dated 6/17/05 shall be protected. Any trees damaged or removed shall be replaced at a rate of 2:1 diameter inches. 4. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). A Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for Water/Wetland Projects (Parts I and II) shall be submitted for the proposed project. The application shall include sequencing discussions and sequencing flexibility requests, if applicable. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. 5. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas 71 Planning Commission Meeting —July 19, 2005 shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. 6. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 1109o' of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and. seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. 7. The proposed development shall maintain existing runoff rates and meet NURP standards. Storm water calculations shall be submitted to ensure the proposed storm water pond is sized adequately for the proposed development. 8. Stable emergency overflows shall be provided for the proposed pond on site. The emergency overflows shall be clearly labeled on the plan and a detail is needed. The emergency overflows may be stabilized with a turf re -enforcement mat or fabric and.riprap. 9. Notes on the plan describing timing of temporary stabilization with Type 1 mulch and seed or erosion control blanket and seed shall. be included. The notes shall include timing of stabilization as well as the rate of mulch application (2 tons per acre, disc anchored). 10. All riprap/fabric at the flared end section shall be installed within 24 hours of flared end section installation. 11. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: TyM of Slone Time (Maximum time an area can Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area 10:1 to 3:1 14 days is not actively being worked.) Flatter than 10:1 21 days These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water. 12. Erosion control blanket shall be specified in the Swale from the flared end section to the wetland along the west boundary of the site. The blanket specified shall adequately protect the area from designed velocity and depth of flow. The blanket and seed in the Swale shall be installed within 5 days of culvert installation. Erosion control blanket is recommended for 72 Planning Commission Meeting —July 19, 2005 the pond slopes from around 952 to 942 contours. All blanket on the plan shall be shown as a shaded area. 13. Temporary sediment basins shall be installed prior to disturbing upslope areas. The areas of temporary sediment basins shall be labeled on the plan. A temporary outlet (e.g., a perforated riser and rock cone) shall be provided for the pond; details should be provided. Temporary basins shall be constructed in the area of the proposed permanent storm water pond, the southeast corner of the site prior to discharging to the culvert under Galpin Boulevard, and possibly in the northwest area of the site to handle water runon from the north prior to discharge to the wetland. 14. Any and all area inlets or drop inlets in paved areas shall be protected with alternate - controls/Wimco details. The engineer shall research and provide alternate designs for Wimco-type inlet controls to fit the various types of inlets. 15. Additional inlet controls shall be provided for adjacent inlets on Galpin Boulevard and Street A. 16. Silt fence shall be installed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond the wetland. 17. Type 1 and Type 2 silt fence locations shall be specified on the plan. Type 2 silt fence shall be installed around all wetland areas and in the southeast corner of the site to protect the culvert under Galpin Boulevard. The silt fence shall be extended along the south side to close the gap in the silt fence. 18. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. 19. The estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $413,661. 20. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase II construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval. 21. In lieu of parkland dedication and trail construction, full park fees shall be collected at the rate in force at the time of final plat for the proposed Chanhassen West Business Park. At current rates, the park fee would total $359,500 (35.95 x $10,000 per acre). 22. A demolition permit must be obtained before beginning demolition of any existing structures. 23. Retaining walls over four high must be designed by a professional engineer and a permit must be obtained prior to construction. 73 Planning Commission Meeting — July l.9, 2005 24. Provide a water service for Lot 6. 25. A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. 26. Fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for fire protection is required to be installed. Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction except when approved alternate methods of protection are provided. 27. The new proposed street will be required to have a street name. Submit proposed street name to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and "approval. a� 28. No burning permits will be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. 29. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support. the imposed load of fire apparatus and shall be surfaced so as to provide all weather driving capabilities. Pursuant to Minnesota Fire code Section 503.2.3. 30. Temporary street signs shall be installed on street intersections when construction of a new roadway allows passage be vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota fire code Section 501.4. 31. Prior to final platting, storm sewer design data will need to be submitted for staff review. Depending on the size of the drainage area, additional catch basins may be required at that time. The storm sewer will have to be designed for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility easements will need to be dedicated on the final plat over the public storm drainage system including storm water ponds, drainage swales, emergency overflows, access routes for maintenance, over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, and buffer areas used as PVC. The minimum easement width shall be 20 feet wide. 32. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. 33. Private utility easements are required for the sanitary sewer and water fines that serve Lot 4 but go through Lot 5. 34. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. 35.On the site plan: a. Revise the cul-de-sac pavement radius to 48 feet. b. Revise the parking driveway aisle from 24 feet to 26 feet wide. 74 Planning Commission Meeting — July 19, 2005 c. Revise the public street width from 32 feet to 36 feet wide. d. Increase the full access width off Galpin Boulevard to 44 feet and create three lane access. e. Shift Lots 1 and 8 easterly access further toward the west and realign the across each other. f. Show at least one, 6-foot wide, side walk along the public street. g. Show the access off Galpin Boulevard turning curb radius. h. Realign lot 5 access perpendicular to the shared driveway. L Show street lights. j. Show handicap parks and ramps. 36.On the grading plan: a. Extend silt fence type between the storm pond and Outlot A. Silt fence Type 11 must be used adjacent to wetlands and storm pond. b. Revise contour lines to match 3:1 maximum slope and tie the proposed contour lines with the existing contours for Lots 4, 5, south of Lot 2 and northeast of Lot 1. c. Show the proposed contour lines for Lot 6. d. Show all retaining walls top and bottom elevations. e. Show all emergency overflows (EOF). The EOF must be 13 lower than the adjacent lowest floor. f Revise Lot 6 parking slope to 0.7% minimum. g. Add a note to remove any existing structure and access off Galpin Boulevard and all disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. h. Show 75-foot minimum construction rock entrance. L No retaining walls structure is allowed within public street and/or public utility easements, revise accordingly. j. Show 20-foot utility casement for the storm sewer between Lots 2 and 3 37.On the utility plans: a. Show all existing and proposed drainage and utility easements. b. Show the proposed sanitary and storm sewer stubs inverts. c. Add storm sewer schedule. d. Public storm sewer pipe type must be RCP and 15-inch minimum diameter. e. The last street accessible storm manhole (STM11##2) must be built with a sump. f. Revise sanitary sewer pipe from DIP to PVC-C900. g. On the utility profile show all sewer and pipe crossings. h. Minimum vertical separation must be 18 inches between watermain and sewer. i. Call out watermain fittings 38. Any retaining wall over four feet in height must be designed by a registered Civil Engineer in the state of Minnesota with an approved safety fence on top of it. Also, it will require a building permit from the Building Department. 75 r , Planning Commission.Met — July 19, 2005 39. Add the following City of Chanhassen Detail Plate Nos. 1002, 2109, 2110 2204, 3104, 3109, 5201, 5205, 5214 and 5215. 40. Prior to final plat approval, a professional civil engineer registered in the state of Minnesota must sign all plans. 41. All of the ponds are required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a .10:1 bench at the NWL. 42. Cross -access easements for the shared driveway accesses must be obtained and recorded against the lots for each of the entrance drives. 43. Any off -site grading will require. easements from the appropriate property owner. 44. Public utility improvements will be required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required at the time of final platting. The applicant will also be required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. The applicant must be aware that all public utility improvements will require a preconstruction meeting before building permit issuance. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. 45. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes and traffic control plans. The applicant should be aware that any off -site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. 46. All private streets are required to have 24-foot wide paved streets from back -of -curb to back - of -curb, be built to a 7-ton design and contained within a 40-foot wide private easement. At the completion of the project, the developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 7-ton design. 47. Six-foot wide sidewalks are required. 48. All plans must be signed by a registered engineer in the state of Minnesota. 49. All of the proposed building pads must have a rear yard elevation at least three feet above the HWL of the adjacent ponds. 50. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's Building Department. 51. Comply with Carver County memo dated June 28, 2005 and revise the plans accordingly. 76 • Planning Commission Meeting — July 19, 2005 52. Revise plan sheet size to 24 x 36 using scale 50. 53. The developer shall either dedicate Outlot C to the City for open space purposes or dedicate a conservation easement over Outlot C." 54. The northeast corner abutting Lot 6, follow the city code and have a 150 foot setback. 55. No motels/hotels be allowed. 56. The combination of the berm height, landscaping and the height of the building on Lot 6 be such that you cannot see the roof line while standing on the ground on Lot number 2 of Trotters Ridge. 57. The applicant work with city staff to resolve any drainage issues with Lot 2 in Trotters Ridge. 58. City staff be directed to revisit the issue of access from the site onto Lyman Boulevard with Carver County. All voted in favor, except Zorn and Larson who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 2. "Papke moved, Keefe seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the Wetland Alteration Permit to frll and alter wetlands within the development, plans prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc., dated June 1.7, 2005, subject to the following conditions: 1. A no loss determination shall be completed for Basin F 31-34. 2. Exemption requests shall be completed for Basins F 51-80 N, Basin F 91-97 and Wetland A. 3. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). A Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for Water/Wetland Projects (Parts 1 and II) shall be submitted for the proposed project. The application shall include sequencing discussions and sequencing flexibility requests, if applicable. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. 4. A five-year wetland replacement monitoring plan shall be submitted. The replacement monitoring plan shall include a detailed management plan for invasive non-native species, particularly purple loosestrife and reed canary grass. The plans shall show fixed photo monitoring points for the replacement wetland. The applicant shall provide proof of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland. 5. Several corrections must be made to the Wetland Mitigation Plan (sheet 10 of 13): 77 ® 4 Planning Commission Meeting July 19, 2005 ., a. Wetland A is shown as an impact area. Upon finalization of exemption paperwork, mitigation will not be required for this wetland; b. Wetland C (Basin F 87-90) is 0.05 acres in area; and c. Wetland D (Basin F 81-86) is 0.09 acres in area. 6. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. 7. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 110010 of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. 8. Drainage and utility easements a minimum of 20 feet in width shall be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used as PVC and storm water ponds. 9. Silt fence shall be installed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond the wetland. :10. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase 11 construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval." All voted in favor, except Zorn and Larson who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote. of 3 to 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Keefe noted the verbatim and summary minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated June 21, 2005 as submitted. Acting Chair McDonald adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 11:15 p.m.. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Nann Opheim iH N EWDOC 0 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION t Application of Eden Trace Corp. for a Rezoning of property from A2, Agricultural Estate District, to PUD, Planned Unit Development for an Office -Industrial Park, Subdivision approval for eight lots, three outlots and associated right-of-way, and a Wetland Alteration permit to fill and grade wetlands on site — Chanhassen West Business Park —.Planning Case 05-23. On July 19, 2005, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application of Eden Trace Corp. for rezoning, preliminary plat approval and wetland alteration permit for the referenced property. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed development preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned A2, Agricultural Estate District. 2. The property is guided in the Land Use Plan for Office/Industrial use. 3. The legal description of the property is: (see Exhibit A) 4. The Subdivision Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider seven possible adverse affects of the proposed subdivision. The seven (7) affects and our findings regarding them are: a. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance; b. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and regional plans including but not limited to the city's comprehensive plan; c. The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and storm water drainage are suitable for the proposed development; d. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage, sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by this chapter; e. The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage; SCANNED v f Th6 proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record; and g. The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the following exists: 1. .Lack of adequate storm water drainage. 2. Lack of adequate roads. 3. Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems. 4. Lack of adequate off -site public improvements or support systems. S. The Zoning Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider six (6) possible adverse affects of the proposed amendment. The six (6) affects and our findings regarding them are: a. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found consistent with the official City Comprehensive Plan. b. The proposed use is compatible with the present and future land uses of the area. c. The proposed use conforms with all performance standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance. d. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. e. The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the city's service capacity. f. Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the property. 6. The planning report #05-23 dated July 19, 2005, prepared by Robert Generous, et al, is incorporated herein. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the preliminary Planned Unit Development, Preliminary Plat and Wetland Alteration permit. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 19a day of July, 2005. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION BY: Its Chairman gApiao12005 planning cases105-23 chanhassen west business pmWindings of fact chan w business parLdoc 04 �� N�WDOC o..�� ♦ M .yl ^ NEWDOC t il , 4 CITY OF. CAANNSFN 7700 Marta Bat'orard PO Box 147 fthassert,MN 55317 Administration Pt a 952227.1100 Fat 952.227.1110 Building Inspections I't %2227.1180 Fax �62227.1190 Engineering i.952227.1160 Fat 952.227.1170 Finance PtwX: 952,227.1140 F=952.227.1110 Park & Recreation ffm 952.227.1120 Fax 952.227.1110 wetimcau 2310 Colt Bo0evard Mm 952227.1400 F2X W.227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources ftOM952227.10 Fax 952.227.4110 Public Works 1591 mark Road Pt 952227.10 Fat 952227.1310 Senior Center H= 952227.1125 Fax 952.227.1110 Web Site nwwAft1lowww o s a3 MEMORANDUM. TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJ: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Bob Generous, Senior Planner September 29, 2005 V Final Plat Approval for Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 PROPOSAL SUMMARY The applicant is requesting final plat approval for Chanhassen West Business Park creating 8 lots, 3 outlots and right-of-way for pub]ic'streets. The proposal includes approximately 40 acres. The development complies with the Planned Unit Development Design Standards approved for the project. Staff is recommending approval of the final plat for Chanhassen West Business Park. City Council approval requires a majority of City Council present. BACKGROUND On August 22, 2005 t:he Chanhassen City Council approved the following: The ordinance Rezoning the property located within the Chanhassen West Business Park from Agricultural Estate District (A2) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) incorporating the development design standards contained within the staff report, as modified by City Council; The Preliminary Plat for Chanhassen West Business Park, plans prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc., dated June 17, 2005, subject to conditions; And, The Wetland. Alteration Permit to fill and alter wetlands within the development, plans prepared bySchoell & Madson, Inc., dated June 17, 2005, subject to conditions. ' FINAL PLAT REVIEW PROPOSAL SUMMARY The applicant is requesting final plat approval for 8 lots, 3 outlots and right-of- way for public streets. As part of the preliminary plat review, the City approved a wetland alteration permit and rezoning of the property to Planned Unit Development. The City of Cha nhassen • Agrowing comsrvntty with ciem 04, quatity schools, a chamung dowrgown, thriving tusuxsses, winding traits, and Deautifut parks. Agzat plae to Frye, work, and play. Mr. Todd Gerhardt September 29, 2005 Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 Page 2 of 22 The proposal meets the requirements of the PUD DevelopmentDesign Standards and is recommended for approval. GRADINGIDRAINAGEIEROSION CONTROL The existing site is about 44.75 acres in size with scattered wetlands. In addition, there are three existing buildings on the property which will have to be razed prior to any grading operations. The current plans show buildings with proposed floor elevations from 961-966. The applicant. is now proposing to grade about 83% of the site for the new building pads, storm pond, and a proposed street ending with a cul-de-sac. The current plans propose eight lots located along the proposed street and cul-de-sac. There are a few areas of concern with the grading plan. Staff would like to see the applicant do a better job of matching in with the existing topography of the site and maintain a side slope of 3:1 maximum. The existing site drains toward the existing three wetlands on the northwesterly and southwesterly corners gnd east side of the parcel. At these elevations, stormwater from the buildings and parking lots will drain toward the proposed catch basins and be conveyed via storm sewer system to the proposed storm pond on the southwesterly corner of the parcel. The pond will treat the water before discharging it to the adjacent wetland. Staff recommends that the swale west of Lot 4 be filled in to reduce the height of or eliminate the need fora retaining wall at this location. In order to do this, the developer must ensure that the off -site run off from the west is diverted. All of the ponds are required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. The applicant is required to meet the existing site runoff rates for a 10-year and 100-year, 24-hour storm event. Storm sewer sizing calculations must be submitted at the time of final plat application. The storm sewer must be sized for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility casements must be dedicated on the final plat over the public storm drainage system including ponds, drainage swales, and wetlands up to the 100-year flood level. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. The applicant must be aware that a retaining wall structure is not allowed within the public street right-of-way. Also, any retaining wall exceeding four feet in height must be designed by a registered structural engineer with approved safety fence and a building permit must be obtained. Erosion control measures and site restoration must be developed in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Staff recommends that the City's Type II erosion control fence, which is a heavy duty silt fence, be used for the area adjacent to the existing wetlands on the north and south grading limits of the site. Type I silt fence shall be used in all other areas. In addition, tree preservation fencing must be installed at the limits of tree removal. Erosion control blankets are recommended for all of the steep 3:1 slopes with an - elevation change of eight feet or more. Mr. Todd Gerhardt September 29, 2005 Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 Page 3 of 22 All disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. The applicant should be aware that any off -site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes. A minimum 75-foot rock construction entrance must be added to the plans at the proposed access off of Galpin Boulevard. UTILITIES Municipal sewer and water stubs are available to the site from Galpin Boulevard on the east side of the parcel. The applicant is proposing to connect to the existing utility .stubs and extend them to the proposed lots to service the site. The sanitary and watermain lines that run within the public street right-of-way and within the shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5 until the last sanitary manhole will be considered a public utility line and the remaining will be considered private utility. Additional gate valves are needed for the shared private watermain between any two lots. Minimum 20-foot widb easements will be required over the public portion of the storm sewer lines between Lots 2 and 3. The underlying property has been previously assessed for sewer, water and street improvements and there is no remaining assessment due payable to the City. Since the developer will be responsible for extending lateral sewer and water service to the lots, the sanitary sewer and water connection charges will be waived. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. All of the utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Upon completion of the utility improvements, the utilities will be turned over to the City for maintenance and ownership. The applicant is also required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will have to be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. STREETS The proposed development lies west of Galpin .Boulevard (CSAH 19) and north of Lyman Boulevard (CSAH 18), A -Minor Expander Arterials as identified on SRF Consulting Group Incorporated's Functional Classification Map. Upon City Council approval of the September 29, 2005 Consent Agenda, the development is subject to the $3,6001developable acre Arterial Collector Fee. All new developments along the Lyman Boulevard corridor are subject to this fee. The proceeds of this fee will fund the Mr. Todd Gerhardt September 29, 2005 Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 Page 4 of 22 reconstruction of Lyman Boulevard between Audubon Road and Powers Boulevard. The Arterial Collector Fee is calculated as follows: 40.15 acres (gross area) — 4.147 acres (area of Outlot. A) — 2.125 acres (area of Outlot B) x $3,600/acre = $121,960.80 Proposed access to the site will be from Galpin Boulevard, which aligns with Stone Creek Drive, an existing local street extending east of Galpin Boulevard. Staff has researched the feasibility of moving the proposed site access from Galpin Boulevard to Lyman Boulevard in response to citizens' requests. Due to wetland conditions, any access from the site to Lyman Boulevard would be 1,000 feet west of Galpin Boulevard. Carver County has identified Lyman Boulevard as a regional east -west collector with limited access; therefore staff recommends that the access to Chanhassen West Business Park remain at the Galpin Boulevard/Stone Creek Drive intersection. This recommendation is also consistent with Section 18-57 of the City Code, which states that "access to arterial streets shall be at intervals of not less ' than one-fourth mile (1,320 feet] and through existing and established crossroads". The developer's traffic engineer, TDI, completed an analysis of traffic and determined that right - in, right -out access from Lyman Boulevard to the site would not significantly reduce the number of vehicles using the Galpin Boulevard access. Based on TDI's findings, a right -in, right -out access on Lyman Boulevard is not proposed. SRF Consulting Group, Inc. analyzed the 2020 transportation system in conjunction with the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan. SRF's forecasted 2020 traffic volume for Galpin Boulevard was based on the 2020 Land Use Map and the construction of the new Trunk: Highway 212. The proposed land use of the Chanhassen West Business Park is consistent with the 2020 land use used in SRF's traffic analysis. SRF's report does not identify a need to upgrade Galpin Boulevard by the year 2020. I Right turn lanes .far north and southbound traffic exist at the Galpin Boulevard intersection with Stone Creek Road and the proposed site access. The developer must submit an access permit to Carver County Public Works for the proposed connection to Galpin Boulevard. As stipulated by the Assistant County Engineer, the developer must submit information on proposed turn lanes with the permit application. There is one public street proposed with the project. The street is proposed as a cul-de-sac running west of Galpin Boulevard and a private shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5. The applicant is proposing the paved streets to be 32-feet wide with a 60-foot wide right-of-way and a 46-foot cul-de-sac paved radius. The applicant must be aware that the City's standard commercial street pavement width is 36-foot wide from back -of -curb to back -of -curb and the cul-de-sac must be 48-foot in radius. Staff is fine with the 24-foot wide shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5. The developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 7-ton design. Mr. Todd Gerhardt September 29, 2005 Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 Page 5 of 22 Staff has concerns of movements of truck traffic accessing off Galpin Boulevard to Lots 1 and 8 being too close. Staff recommends increasing the access width to 44 feet to create a three lane access off Galpin Boulevard and increase the turning curb radius. Also, relocate Lots' 1 and 8 easterly accesses further to the west and re -align them opposite of each other. The applicant should be aware that, in commercial districts, six-foot wide sidewalks are required and the parking driveway aisle must be 26-feet wide. Cross -access easements will be obtained for the shared driveways and recorded against the lots. PARKS AND RECREATION Comprehensive Park Plan The proposed Chanhassen West Business Park. development is located within an area that is outside the municipal park service boundaries of Stone Creek Park and the Chanhassen Nature Preserve. The development shall pay full park fees'in force at the time of final plat approval in the amount of $359,500 (35.95 x $10,000 per acre). Parks fees for 2005 are $10,000.per acre. Comprehensive Trail Plan The site does not contain any portion of the City's trail plan. A sidewalk connection to the trails in Galpin Boulevard is proposed as part of the development. LANDSCAPING The applicant does not meet minimum requirements for the buffer yards along the south and east property lines. Staff recommends that buffer yard plantings be increased in these areas to meet . minimum requirements. The applicant has saved a large portion of the existing, mature oaks on site. This preservation will add a unique feel to the site and proved the residential neighborhood to the north an added buffer for the development. The applicant did an excellent job fitting the design to the site. COMPLIANCE TABLE Areas . ft. Fronta a ft. Depth ft.) Notes Code 43,560 150 200 Lot 1, Blk 2 166,233 328 354 Lot 2, Blk 2 144,036 238 354 Lot 3, Blk 2 124,349 329 350 Wetland setback Lot 4, Blk 2 219,215 35 # 380 Wetland setback Lot 5, Blk 2 156,190 75 @ 404 Wetland setback Lot 3, Blk 1 257,813 80 @ 460 North buffer yard Mr. Todd Gerhardt September 29, 2005 Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05=23 Page 6 of 22 Areas . ft. Frontage ft. De th ft. Notes Lot 2, Blk 1 82,385 205 366 Lot 1, Blk 1 97,843 328 368 Outlot A 180,643 Ponding and wetland mitigation Outlot B 92,577 Wetland Outlot C 165,365 Preserved woodlands ROW 162,069 1 1.42 acres Total 11,748,718 1 140.15 acres # Lot must be revised to meet the minimum 60 feet frontage on cul-de-sac. @ Exceeds the 60 feet frontage on cul-de-sac. REVIEW CONDITIONS OF APROVAL 1. Applicant shall increase landscape plantings in the south and east property line bufferyards to meet minimum requirements. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted before final approval. ' This condition still applies. 2. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to any construction activities. Fencing shall remain in place until construction is completed. This condition still applies. 3. All trees shown as preserved on plans dated 6/17/05 shall be protected. Any trees damaged or removed shall be replaced at a rate of 2:1 diameter inches. This condition still applies. 4. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). A Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for Water/Wetland Projects (Parts I and II) shall be submitted for the proposed project. The application shall include sequencing discussions and sequencing flexibility requests, if applicable. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. * This condition has been partially met and can be modified as follows: Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). Mr. Todd Gerhardt September 29, 2005 Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 Page 7 of 22 ibifitj ' . The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. 5. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 4040ot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. * This condition still applies. 6. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. x This condition still applies. 7. The proposed development shall maintain existing runoff rates and meet NURP standards. Storm water calculations shall be submitted to ensure the proposed storm water pond is sized adequately for the proposed development. "This condition has been met. S. Stable emergency overflows shall be provided for the proposed pond on site. The emergency overflows shall be clearly labeled on the plan and a detail is needed. The emergency overflows may be stabilized with a turf re -enforcement mat or fabric and riprap. This condition still applies. 9. Notes on the plan describing timing of temporary stabilization with Type 1 mulch and seed or erosion control blanket and seed shall be included. The notes shall include timing of stabilization as well as the rate of mulch application (2 tons per acre, disc anchored). X This condition still applies. 10. All riprap/fabric at the flared end section .shall be installed within 24 hours of flared end section installation. This condition still applies. Mr. Todd Gerhardt September 29, 2005 Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 Page S of 22 , l i. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of Slone Time (Maximum time an area can Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area 10:1 to 3:1 .14 days is not actively being worked.) Flatter than 10:1 21 days These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water. * This condition still applies. 12. Erosion control blanket shall be specified in the swale from the flared end section to the wetland along the west boundary of the site. The blanket specified shall adequately protect the area from designed velocity and depth of flow.. The blanket and seed in the swale shall be installed within 5 days of culvert installation. Erosion control blanket is recommended for the pond slopes from around .952 to 942 contours. All blanket on the plan shall be shown as a shaded area. "This condition still applies. 13. Temporary sediment basins shall be installed prior to disturbing upslope areas. The areas of temporary sediment basins shall be labeled on the plan. A temporary outlet (e.g,, a perforated riser and rock cone) shall be provided for the pond; details should be provided. Temporary basins shall be constructed in the area of the proposed permanent storm water pond, the southeast corner of the site prior to discharging to the culvert under Galpin Boulevard, and possibly in the northwest area of the site to handle water runon from the north prior to discharge to the wetland. "This condition still applies. 14. Any and all area inlets or drop inlets in paved areas shall be protected with alternate controls/Wimco details. The engineer shall research and provide alternate designs for Wimco-type inlet controls to fit the various types of inlets. This condition still applies. 15. Additional inlet controls shall be provided for adjacent inlets on Galpin Boulevard and Street A. Mr. Todd Gerhardt September 29, 2005 Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 Page 9 of 22 * This condition shall be modified as follows: Additional inlet controls shall be provided for adjacent inlets on Galpin Boulevard and Galpin Court. 16. Silt fence shall be installed around 4utlot A along the east side between the pond and the wetland. This condition still applies. 17. Type 1 and Type 2 silt fence locations shall be specified on the plan. Type 2 silt fence shall be installed around all wetland areas and in the southeast corner of the site to protect the culvert under Galpin Boulevard. The silt fence shall be extended along the south side to close the gap in the silt fence. "This condition still applies. 18. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. "This condition still applies. 19. The estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the. City at the time of final plat recording, is $413,661. This condition shall be modified as follows: The total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $449-,664- 301,493.29. 20. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, :Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase II construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval. * This condition still applies. 21. In lieu of parkland dedication and trail construction, full park fees shall be collected at the rate in force at the time of final plat for the proposed Chanhassen West Business Park. At current rates, the park fee would total $359,500 (35.95 x $10,000 per acre). k This condition still applies. 22. A demolition permit must be obtained before beginning demolition of any existing structures. "This condition still applies. Mr. Todd Gerhardt September 29, 2005 Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 Page .10 of 22 23. Retaining walls over four high must be designed by a professional engineer and a permit must be obtained prior to construction. This condition is a duplicate of condition 38 and shall be deleted. 24. Provide a water service for Lot 6. x This condition has been met. 25. A 10-foot clear space must. be maintained around fire hydrants i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. This condition still applies. 26. Fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for fire protection is required to be installed. Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction except when approved alternate methods of protection are provided. X This condition still applies. 27. The new proposed street will be required.to have a street name. Submit proposed street name to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval. * This condition has been met. The proposed street name is Galpin Court. 28. No burning permits will be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. This condition still applies. 29. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed load of fire apparatus and shall be surfaced so as to provide all weather driving capabilities. Pursuant to Minnesota Fire code Section 503.2.3. This condition still applies. 30. Temporary street signs shall be installed on street intersections when construction of a new roadway allows passage be vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota fire code Section 501.4. This condition still applies. Mr. Todd Gerhardt September 29, 2005 Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 Page 11 of 22 31. Prior to final platting, storm sewer design data will need to be submitted for staff review. Depending on the size of the drainage area, additional catch basins may be required at that time. The storm sewer will have to be designed for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility easements will need to be dedicated on the final plat over the public storm drainage system including storm water ponds, drainage swales., emergency overflows, access routes for maintenance, over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, and buffer areas used as PVC. The minimum easement width shall be 20 feet wide. x This condition shall be modified as follows: Prior to �-J.-M.-Mg construction, storm sewer design data will need to be submitted with drainage map for staff review. Depending on the size of the drainage area, additional catch basins may be required at that time. The storm sewer will have to be designed for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility easements will need to be dedicated on the final plat over the public storm drainage system including storm water ponds, drainage swales, emergency overflows, access routes for maintenance, over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, and buffer areas used as PVC. The minimum easement width shall be 20'feet wide. 32. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. This condition still applies. 33. Private utility easements are required for the sanitary sewer and water lines that serve Lot 4 but go through Lot 5. This condition shall be modified as follows: . Show minimum 30- foot utility easement between Lots 4 and 5 along the private driveway from sanitary MH #6 to MH #8. 34. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. * This condition still applies. 35. On the site plan: . a. Revise the cul-de-sac pavement radius to 48 feet. b. Revise the parking driveway aisle from 24 feet to 26 feet wide. c. Revise the public street width from 32 feet to 36 feet wide. d. Increase the full access width off Galpin Boulevard to 44 feet and create three lane access. Mr. Todd Gerhardt September 29, 2005 Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 Page 12 of 22 e. Shift Lots 1. and 8 easterly access further toward the west and realign the across each other. f. Show at least one, 6-foot wide, side walk along the public street. g. Show the access off Galpin Boulevard turning curb radius. h. Realign lot 5 access perpendicular to the shared driveway. i. Show street lights. j. Show handicap parks and ramps. This condition shall be modified as follows: On the site plan: a. Revise the cul-de-sac pavement radius to 48 feet. b. .Revise the parking driveway aisle from 24 feet to 26 feet wide. c. Revise the public street width from 32 feet to 36 feet. wide. d. Increase the full access width off Galpin Boulevard to 44 feet and create three lane access. e. ' Shift Lots 1 and 8 easterly access further toward the wdst and realign them across from each other. f. Show at least one, 6-foot wide, side walk along the public street and pedestrian curb ramps. g. Show the access off Galpin Boulevard turning curb radius. h. Realign lot 5 access perpendicular to the shared driveway. j. Show handicap parkaing spots and ramps. k. Show concrete driveway apron at every lot access per detail #5207. 36.On the grading plan: a. Extend silt fence type between the storm pond and Outlot A. Silt fence Type II must be used adjacent to wetlands and storm pond. b. Revise contour lines to match 3:1 maximum slope and tie the proposed contour lines with the existing contours for Lots 4, 5, south of Lot 2 and northeast of Lot 1, Block 2. c. Show the proposed contour lines for Lot 6. d. Show all retaining walls top and bottom elevations. e. Show all emergency overflows (EOF). The EOF must be l3 lower than the adjacent lowest floor. f. Revise Lot 6 parking slope to 0.7% minimum. g. Add a note to remove any existing structure and access off Galpin Boulevard and all disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. h. Show 75-foot minimum construction rock entrance. i. No retaining walls structure is allowed within public street and/or public utility easements, revise accordingly. j. " Show 20-foot utility easement for the storm sewer between Lots 2 and 3 k. Show contour lines for the berm on Outlot B. Mr. Todd Gerhardt September 29, 2005 Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 Page 13 of 22 "This condition shall be modified as follows: On the grading plan: a. Extend silt fence between the storm pond and Outlot A. Silt fence Type If must be used adjacent to wetlands and storm pond. b. Revise contour lines to match 3:1 maximum slope and tie the proposed contour lines with. the existing contours for Lots 4, 5, Block 2, south of Lot 2, Block 2, and northeast of Lot 1, Block 2. c. Show the proposed contour lines for Lot 6. d. Show all retaining walls top and bottom elevations. e. Show all emergency overflows (EOF). The EOF must be 1.5' lower than the adjacent lowest floor. f. Revise Lot 6 3, Block 1 parking slope to 0.7% minimum. g. Add a note to remove any existing structure and access off Galpin Boulevard and Lyman Boulevard. Aell disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. h. Show 7S-foot minimum construction rock entrance. i. No retaining walla structure is allowed within public street and/or public utility easements, revise accordingly. j. k. Show contour lines for the berm on Outlot B. 37.On the utility plans: a. Show all existing and proposed drainage and utility easements. b. Show the proposed sanitary and storm sewer stubs inverts. c. Add storm sewer schedule. d. Public storm sewer pipe type must be RCP and 15-inch minimum diameter. e. The last street accessible storm manhole (STMH#2) must. be built with a sump. f. Revise sanitary sewer pipe from DIP to PVC-C900. , g. On the utility profile show all sewer and pipe crossings. h. Minimum vertical separation must be 18 inches between watermain and sewer. i. Call out watermain fittings k This condition shall be modified as follows: On the utility plans: a. Show all eyiisting-m+d 20-foot proposed drainage and utility easements between Lots 2 and 3, Black 2. b. Show the proposed sanitary and storm sewer stubs inverts. c. Add storm sewer schedule. d. Public storm sewer pipe type must be RCP and 15-inch minimum diameter. e. The last street accessible storm manhole (STMH#2A) must be built with a sump. g. On the utility profile show all sewer and pipe crossings. h. Minimum vertical separation must be 18 inches between watermain and sewer. i. Call out watermain fittings. Mr. Todd Gerhardt September 29, 2005 . Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 Page 14 of 22 j. Add the outlet control structure per detail #3109. 38. Any retaining wall over four feet in height must be designed by a registered Civil Engineer in the state of Minnesota with an approved safety fence on top of it. Also, it will require a building permit from the Building Department. This condition still applies. 39. Add the following City of Chanhassen Detail Plate Nos. 1002, 2109, 2110 2204, 3104, 3109, 5201, 5205, 5214 and 5215. This condition shall be modified as follows: Add the following City of Chanhassen latest Detail Plate 'Nos.1001, 1002,1003, 2109, 21.10, 2201, 2204, 2205, 3104, , 5201, 5205, 5214, find 5215, 5216, 5217, 5221, 5232, 5240, 5241, 5242, 5302 and 5313. 40. Prior to final plat approval, a professional civil engineer registered in the statd of Minnesota must sign all plans. This condition still applies. 41. All of the ponds are required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. This condition shall be modified as follows: Storm ponds af@ is required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. Submit drainage calculations for staff review. 42. Cross -access easements for the shared driveway accesses must be obtained and recorded against the lots for each of the entrance drives. '•` This condition still applies. 43. Any off -site grading will require easements from the appropriate property owner. This condition still applies. 44. Public utility improvements will be required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required at the time of final platting. The applicant will also be required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. The applicant must be aware that all public utility improvements will require a preconstruction meeting before building permit .issuance. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be obtained, including but Mr. Todd Gerhardt September 29, 2005 Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 Page 15 of 22 not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. ' This condition still applies. 45..If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes and traffic control plans. The applicant should be aware that any off -site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. This condition still applies. a 46. All private streets are required to have 24-font wide paved streets from back -of -curb to back - of -curb, be built to a 7-ton design and contained within a 40-foot. wide private easement. At the completion of the project, the developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 7-ton design. x This condition shall be modified as follows: All private streets are required to have .4 26 foot wide paved streets from back -of -curb to back -of -curb, be built to a; 9-ton design and contained within a 40-foot wide private easement. At the completion of the project, the developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 7 9-ton design. 5 47. Six-foot wide sidewalks are required. ' This condition has been met. 48. All of the proposed building pads must have a rear yard elevation at least three feet above the HWL of the adjacent ponds. I This condition still applies. 49. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's Building Department. x This condition still applies. 50. Comply with Carver County memo dated June 28, 2005 and revise the plans accordingly. X This condition still applies. 51. Revise plan sheet size to 24 x 36 using scale 50. Mr. Todd Gerhardt September 29, 2005 Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 Page 16 of 22 "This condition still applies. 52. The developer shall dedicate a permanent conservation easement over Outlot C. This condition still applies. 53. The applicant shall work with staff to resolve any drainage issues along Lots 5, 6 and Outlot C. This condition still applies. 54. The developer shall construct a berm within the 16 foot setback outside the wetland buffer zone on Lot 5. This condition still applies. In addition, based on the review of the final development plans, staff recommends that the following conditions be added: .1. Revise the construction plans to correspond with the final plat lot designations. 2. Approval of the final plat is contingent upon approval of final construction plans/specifications for the project along with the developer entering into a development contract with the City and supplying the necessary financial security and fees. 3. The developer shall pay the $121,960.80 Arterial Collector Fee. 4. The developer shall work with the City of Chaska to accommodate storm water from properties to the west of the project. RECONT MI ENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following motion: Me Chanhassen City Council approves the Final Plat for Chanhassen West Business Park creating 8 lots, 3 outlots and associated right-of-way for public streets (plans prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc., dated September 6, 2005), subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant shall increase landscape plantings in the south and east property line bufferyards to .meet minimum requirements. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted before final approval. Mr. Todd Gerhardt September 29, 2005 Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 Page 17 of 22 2. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to any construction activities. Fencing shall remain in place until construction is completed. 3. All trees shown as preserved on plans dated 6/17/05 shall be protected. Any trees damaged or removed shall be replaced at a rate of 2:1 diameter inches. 4. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. 5. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. 6. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. 7. Stable emergency overflows shall be provided for the proposed pond on site. The emergency overflows shall be clearly labeled on the plan and a detail is needed. The emergency overflows may be stabilized with a turf re -enforcement mat or fabric and riprap. 8. Notes on the plan describing timing of temporary stabilization with Type 1 mulch and seed or erosion control blanket and seed shall be included. The notes shall include timing of stabilization as well as the rate of mulch application (2 tons per acre, disc anchored). 9. All riprap/fabric at the flared end section shall be installed within 24 hours of flared end section installation. 10. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of Slone Time (Maximum time an area can Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area 10:1 to 3:1 14 days is not actively being worked.) .Flatter than 10:1 21 days Mr. Todd Gerhardt ' September 29, 2005 Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 Page 18 of 22 These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water. 11. Erosion control blanket shall be specified in the swale from the flared end section to the wetland along the west boundary of the site. The blanket specified shall adequately protect the area from designed velocity and depth of flow. The blanket and seed in the swale shall be installed within 5 days of culvert installation. Erosion control blanket is recommended for the pond slopes from around .952 to 942 contours. All blanket on the plan shall be shown as a shaded area. 12. Temporary sediment basins shall be installed prior to disturbing upslope areas. The areas of temporary sediment basins shall be labeled on the plan. A temporary outlet (e.g., a perforated riser and rock cone) shall be provided for the pond; details should be provided. Temporary basins shall be constructed in the area of the proposed permanent storm water pond, the southeast corner of the site prior to discharging to the culvert under Galpin Boulevard, and possibly in the northwest area of the site to handle water runon from the north prior to discharge to the wetland. 13. Any and all area inlets or drop inlets in paved areas shall be protected with alternate controls/Wimco details. The engineer shall research and provide alternate designs for Wimco-type inlet controls to fit the various types of inlets. 14. Additional inlet controls shall be provided for adjacent inlets on Galpin Boulevard and Galpin Court. 15. Silt fence shall be installed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond and the wetland. 16. Type 1 and Type 2 silt fence locations shall be specified on the plan. Type 2 silt fence shall be installed around all wetland areas and in the southeast corner of the site to protect the culvert under Galpin Boulevard. The silt fence shall be extended along the south side to close the gap in the silt fence. 17. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. 18. The total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $301,493.29. 19. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase H construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and Mr. Todd Gerhardt September 29, 2005 Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 Page 19 of 22 comply with their conditions of approval. 20. In lieu of parkland dedication and trail construction, full park fees shall be collected at the rate in force at the time of final plat for the proposed Chanhassen West. Business Park. At current rates, the park fee would total $359,500 (35.95 x $10,000 per acre). 21. A demolition permit must be obtained before beginning demolition of any existing structures. 22. A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. 23. Fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for fire protection is required to be installed. Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction except when approved alternate methods of protection are provided. 24. No burning permits will be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. 25. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed load of fire apparatus and shall be surfaced so as to provide all weather driving capabilities. Pursuant to Minnesota Fire code Section 503.2.3. 26. Temporary street signs shall be installed on street intersections when construction of a new roadway allows passage be vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota fire code Section 501.4. 27. Prior to construction, storm sewer design data will need to be submitted with drainage map for staff review. Depending on the size of the drainage area, additional catch basins may be required at that time. The storm sewer will have to be designed for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility easements will need to be dedicated on the final plat over the public storm drainage system including storm. water ponds, drainage swales, emergency overflows, access routes for maintenance, over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, and buffer areas used as PVC. The minimum easement width shall be 20 feet wide. 28. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. 29. Show minimum 30-foot utility easement between Lots 4 and 5, Block 2 along the private driveway from sanitary ME #6 to MH #8. 30. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of Mr. Todd Gerhardt September 29, 2005 Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 Page 20 of 22 building permit issuance. 31.On the site plan: a. Revise the cul-de-sac pavement radius to 48 feet. b. Revise the parking driveway aisle from 24 feet to 26 feet wide. c. Revise the public street width from 32 feet to 36 feet wide. d. Increase the full access width off Galpin Boulevard to 44 feet and create three lane access. e. Shift Lots 1 and 8 easterly access further toward the west and realign them across from each other. f. Show at least one, 6-foot wide, side walk along the public street and pedestrian curb ramps. g. Show the access off Galpin Boulevard turning curb radius. h. Realign Lot 5, Block 2 access perpendicular to the shared driveway. i. Show handicap parking spots and ramps. j. Show concrete driveway apron at every lot access per detail #5207. 32.On the grading plan: a. Extend silt fence between the storm pond and Outlot A. Silt fence Type H must be used adjacent to wetlands and storm pond. b. Revise contour lines to match 3:1 maximum slope and tie the proposed contour lines with the existing contours for Lots 4, 5, Block 2, south of Lot 2, Block 1, and northeast of Lot 1, Block 2. c. Show the proposed contour lines for Lot 3, Block 1. d. Show all retaining walls top and bottom elevations. e. Show all emergency overflows (EOF). The EOF must be 1.5' lower than the adjacent lowest floor. f Revise Lot 3, Block 1 parking slope to 0.7% minimum. g. Add a note to remove any existing structure and access off Galpin Boulevard and Lyman Boulevard. All disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. h. Show 75-foot minimum construction rock entrance. i. No retaining walls structure is allowed within public street and/or public utility easements, revise accordingly. j. Show contour lines for the berm on Outlot B. 33.On the utility plans: a. Show 20-foot proposed drainage and utility easements between Lots 2 and 3, Block 2. b. Show the proposed sanitary and storm sewer stubs inverts. c. Add storm sewer schedule. d. Public storm sewer pipe type must be RCP and 15-inch minimum diameter.. e. The last street accessible storm manhole (STMH#2) must be built with a sump. f. On the utility profile show all sewer and pipe crossings. g. Minimum vertical separation must be 18 inches between watermain and sewer. h. Call out watermain fittings Mr. Todd Gerhardt September 29, 2005 Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 Page 21 of 22 L Add the outlet control structure per detail #3109. 34. Any retaining wall over four feet in height must be designed by a registered Civil Engineer in the state of Minnesota with an approved safety fence on top of it. Also, it will require a building permit from the Building Department. 35. Add the following City of Chanhassen latest Detail Plate Nos. 1001, 1002, 1003, 2109, 2110, 2201, 2204, 2205, 3104, 5201, 5205, 5214, 5215, 5216, 5217, 5221, 5232, 5240, 5241, 5242, 5302 and 5313. 36. Prior to final plat approval, a professional civil engineer registered in the state of Minnesota must sign all plans. 37. Storm pond is required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3:1. slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. Submit drainage calculations for staff review. ' 38. Cross -access easements for the shared driveway accesses must be obtained and.recorded against the lots for each of the entrance drives. 39. Any off -site grading will require easements from the appropriate property owner. 40. Public utility improvements will be required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required at the time of final platting. The applicant will also be required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. The applicant must. be aware that all public utility improvements will require a preconstruction meeting before building permit issuance. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed. District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. 4.1.1f importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes and traffic control plans. The applicant should be aware that any off -site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. 42. All private streets are required to have 26-foot wide paved streets from back -of -curb to back - of -curb, be built to a 9-tan design and contained within a 40-foot wide private easement. At the completion of the project, the developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 9-ton design. Mr. Todd Gerhardt September 29, 2005 Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 Page 22 of 22 43. All of the proposed building pads must have a rear yard elevation at least three feet above the HWL of the adjacent ponds. 44. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's Building Department. 45. Comply with Carver County memo dated June 28, 2005 and revise the plans accordingly. 46. Revise plan sheet size to 24 x 36 using scale 50. 47. The developer shall dedicate a permanent conservation easement over Outlot. C. 48. The applicant shall work with staff to resolve any drainage.issues along Lots 5, 6 and Outlot C. 49. The developer shall construct a berm within the 16 foot setback outside the wetland buffer zone do Lot 5. 50. Revise the construction plans to correspond with the final plat lot designations. 51. Approval of the final plat is contingent upon approval of final construction plans/specifications for the project along with the developer entering into a development contract with the City and supplying the necessary financial security and fees. 52. The developer shall pay the $121,960.80 Arterial Collector Fee. 53. The developer shall work with the City of Chaska to accommodate storm water from properties to the west of the project site" ATTACHMENTS 1. Final plat. 2. Memo to Pat Minger from Paul Moline, Carver County Water Management Dated 9/19/05. gVlan12005 planning tases\05-23 Chanhassen West Basins Park\Chanhassen West Business Park fp.doc Carver County Water Management— Department of Planning &Zoning Gaysrrt�nt GerP.�—Ac1rinSU'ation f3ukEng 600 East P Strom Chaska, Khroesco 55318 Phone: (952)361-1820 Fax: (9S2)361-1828 W w.ca.carVWXW.WMter ' 1 0• To: Pat Minger From: Paul Moline, Carver County Water Management Date: 9/19/2005 Re: Chanhassen West Business park County Water Project WP20050038 Co. Lori Haak, City of Chanhassen Jerry Backman, Schoell-Madson Aaron Mlynek, Carver SWCD Robert Generous, City of Chanhassen Enclosures: SW PPP Comments Carver County Water Management has received plans (dated 8/25/05), SW PPP and hydrologic calculations (dated 8126/05) for the Chanhassen West Business Park project in the City of Chanhassen. The following comments include review by the County, the SWCD and Wenck Associates: Stormwater Issues: 1. The calculations for existing conditions should be resubmitted and show the effects of ponding in the northeast wetland. The submitted calculations use sheet flow runoff from 35.74 acres to the southwest wetland, which is not representative of the Existing Drainage figure. The increase in runoff may have impacts on downstream and water quality treatment on site. 2. Water Quality calculations need to be submitted for review. 3. Proposed CNs for greenspace should be raised to C type soils to account for the affect of compaction. 4. Downstream capacity of the southwest wetland (Outlot A) should be submitted. 5. The outlet of the northwest wetland (Outlot B) should be submitted. 6. Rainwater Gardens/Infiltration -.Additional details are needed including: • Documentation should be submitted for the volume provided for infiltration. Several basins are noted on the plans, but no calculations are provided. • Soils used (sand fill or rock fill, 5011/6 clean sand, 25% loamy topsoil, 25% compost) • Cross -sections Erosion control blanket and type Tuning of installation (after contributing area is stabilized). To reduce initial degradation of basins, It is recommended plugs, shrubs and grasses are used in addition to the `rainwater garden seed mix'. Erosion and Sediment Control: (please contact Aaron Mlynek at the Carver SWCO at 952.442-5101 for questions or assistance on this section) Erosion Control 1. Stable EOFs are needed for the proposed pond on site. The EOF should be clearly labeled on the plan and a detail is needed. The EOF can be stabilized with a turf re -enforcement mat or fabric and riprap. 2. Erosion control blanket should be specified in the swale from the FES to the wetland along the west boundary of the site. The blanket specified should adequately protect the area from designed velocity and depth of flow. The blanket and seed in the swale should be installed within 24 hours of culvert installation. All blanket on the plan should be shown as a shaded area. 3. Erosion control blanket is recommended for the pond slopes from around 952 to 942 contours. All blanket on the plan should be shown as a shaded area. 4. Erosion note number 5 should include 2 tons of mulch per acre with seed for stabilization; seed alone is not considered stabilization. S. A11 curb cuts need riprap and fabric or sod installed within 24 hours of curb installation. Sediment Control 1. Temporary sediment basins are needed prior to disturbing upsiope areas. The areas of temporary sediment basins should be labeled on the plan. A temporary outlet is needed for the pond; details should be provided. A temporary outlet could consist of a perforated riser and rock cone. Temporary basins are needed in the area of the proposed permanent stormwater pond; the SE comer of the site prior to discharging to the culvert under Galpin. 2. The Wimco inlet control detail proposed will work for all curbside inlets. Any and all area inlets or drop inlets in paved areas will need aftemate controls 1 Wimco details. The engineer should check on aftemate designs for Wimco-type inlet controls to fit the various type of inlets. 3. Additional inlet controls may be needed for adjacent inlets on Galpin and Street A. 4. Sift fence will be needed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond the wetland. 5. Sift fence needed for Lot 5, Outlot B. 6. Silt fence needed north of berm in Lot 6 as there is a FES taking water north off site..: 7. Sift fence needed south of Lot 1. 8. Each building site will need perimeter controls once the streets are paved and. rock exits will be needed as each lot is buift•out. 9. Type 1 and Type 2 sift fence locations need to be specified on the plan. Type 2 should be installed around all wetland areas and in the SE comer of the site to protect the culvert under Galpin. The SF should be extended along the South side to close the gap in the SF. SWPPP A SWPPP review has been completed; any items not marked with an `x' or `n/a' need attention. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. A follow up meeting may be of benefit. Paul Moline 952.361.1825 p m olln e Q co. carver. mn. us a Page 2 CW4,1 Eq vJJ,A1C,5 ` f �� f13/dS� Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Checklist SWPPP contains a combination of narrative plan sheets )i standard detail sheets (where appropriate) Does the SWPPP Narrative: escribe the nature of the construction activity? Jkr Address the potential for a discharge of sediment and/or other potential pollutants from the site? Identify the person who will oversee the SWPPP implementation? E3 Identify the entity responsible for long term O&M of the permanent storm water management system? )R' List the chain of responsibility for SWPPP implementation for all operators on the site? �K Describe of installation timing for all ESC BMPs? Describe procedures to establish additional temporary ESC BMPs as necessary for site conditions? � Describe final stabilization methods for all exposed areas? (may be in narrative or on plan sheets) V" Identify storm water management measures needed to mitigate impacts identified as a result of environmental, historical, archaeological, or rare species reviews conducted for the project? 4 dentify additional measures being taken to protect Drinking Water Supply Management Areas? ;lf site discharges to impaired reach, identify any site areas discharging to the impaired reach? Do plan sheets identify: V Existing and final grades? C3 Locations and types of all temporary and permanent ESC BMPs7 S�!'''i F"' ' 1� 5 .>' Stormwater flow directions and surface water divides for all pre- and post -construction drainage areas? Impervious areas? 91' Soil types? W Locations of areas not to be disturbed? El' Limits of construction phases? W Locations of all wetlands and surface waters that will receive pre- or post -construction site runoff (if don't fit on the plan sheets, an arrow to note the direction and distance)? Standard plates or specifications: 0 Are standard plates or specifications included where appropriate? Part Stormwater Discharge Design Requirements Are Temporary Sediment Basins required on site? (10 acres draining to common location) If Yes, are they: o Adequately sized — 2yr, 24hr storm, min. 1,800 fe/acre; OR no cale. min. 3,6000acre? o Designed to prevent short circuiting? o Are outlets designed to remove floating debris? o Are outlets designed to allow complete drawdown? o Do outlets have energy dissipation? o Have a stabilized emergency spillway? Permanent Stormwater Management System ,Iq(' Is calculation of new impervious surface included in SWPPP? Are calculations for permanent stormwater management system included (water quality volume of % inch of runoff)? �j ,Are there areas of the project where typical treatment methods arenot feasible? (up to 1 % of project size or 3 cumulative acres OR proximity to bedrock OR road projects lacking of right of way) );b If yes, has effort been made to provide some treatment using alternatives? ,A/kGrassed swales Smaller ponds o Grit chambers 14 Inspections performed once every 7 days Inspections performed within 24 hrs of a rain event greater than 0.5 in/24 hr Inspection and Maintenance records include Date and time of inspection Name of person(s) conducting inspections Finding of inspections and recommendations for corrective actions 1#S Date and amount of rainfall events greater than 0.5 in/24 hr Mainz ante performed `Silt fence repaircdlreplaced/supplemented when nonfunctional, or full; within 24 hours Sediment basins drained and sediment removed when reaches =/z storage volume; within 72 hours Sediment removed from surface waters within 7 days Construction site exits inspected, tracked sediment removed within 24 hours Addresses pollution prevention management measures: Solid waste disposed properly; comply with MPCA requirements Hazardous waste stored (secondary containment, restricted access) and disposed in compliance with MPCA requirements External washing of -vehicles limited. Runoff contained and waste properly disposed No engine degreasing allowed on site Addresses final stabilization: Stabilization by uniform perennial vegetative cover (70% density) Drainage ditches stabilized All temporary synthetic and ,structural BMPs removed Clean out sediment from conveyances and sedimentation basins (return to design capacity) If residential — distribute homeowner factsheet Submit NOT Requirements of Appendix A h MA -Does this site drain to a discharge point on the project that is within 2000 feet of a Special Water? Which Tvne of Special Water? Wilderness Areas Mississippi River Scenic or Recreational river Lake Superior Lake Trout Lakes Trout Lakes Scientific &Natural areas Trout Streams BMP Category C.1, C.2, C.3, CA C.1, C.2, C.3 C.1, C.2, C.3 C.1, C.2, C.3 C.1, C.2, C.3, CA C.1, C.2, C.3, CA C.1, C.2, C.3, CA C.1, C.2, C.3, C.5 Are BMPs required for that Special Water shown on plans? BMP Category Requirement C.1 protect slopes/provide temp basin for 5 acres draining to common location C.2 treat water quality volume of 1 inch of runoff C.3 maintain buffer zone of 100 linear feet from Special Water CA post project volume/rate control C.5 temperature controls # Dothissite discharge to wetlands? �S Has wetland mitigative sequence been followed? OR Which method of permanent stormwatcr treatment has been selected? Wet sedimentation basin Permanent volume of 1800 W below outlet pipe for each acre draining Minimum depth of 3 ft; maximum depth of 10 ft isY Configured so scour or resuspcnsion is minimized �i Water quality volume is % inch of ninoff from new impervious surfaces Basin outlets designed to discharge at less than 5.66 cfs per acre of pond Basin outlets designed to prevent short circuiting y Basin outlets designed to prevent discharge of floatables ❑ Stabilized emergency overflow V Is adequate maintenance access provided? �} infiltration/filtration Is infiltration/filtration appropriate to the site and land uses? Is infiltration system not excavated to final grade until drainage area constructed and stabilized? Are rigorous sediment and erosion controls used to keep sediment and runoff away? Is a pretreatment device used? Is the system sufficient to infiltrate or filter the appropriate water quality volume? Can water quality volume be discharged in 48 hours or less? O If not, are they routed through stabilized discharge point? Is there a way to visually verify the system is operating as designed? Has appropriate testing been conducted to ensure a minimum of 3 feet of separation? .Are calculations and computer model results included to demonstrate the design adequacy of the filtration system? ` Is adequate maintenance access provided? Does the maintenance plan identify who will perform future maintenance? Regional ponds Is written authorization from owner of regional pond included in SWPPP? Is there no significant degradation of waterways between project and regional pond? Does regional pond design conform to the permit requirements for wet sedimentation basin? Combination of practices :Is the entire water quality volume be accounted for? Are computer models and/or calculations included in the SWPPP? OAlternative method SWPPP, including the Alternative Method documentation, to MPCA for review and approval at ldast 90 days prior to the proposed starting date of construction activity. Pa IV — Construction Activity Requirements Addresses erosion prevention measures: Are areas not to be disturbed delineated on plans? Has appropriate construction phasing been implemented? Do exposed soils with positive slope within 200 feet of surface water have erosion protection/cover? o Are wetted perimetcrs of ditches stabilized within 200 feet of surface water? 7( Do pipe outlets have energy dissipation within 24 hours of connecting? Ad es sediment control measures: Are slopes with a 3:1 grade broken up into lengths less than 75 feet? o Are sediment control practices established on down gradient perimeters? Are all inlets protected? o Do stockpiles have sediment control and placed in areas away from surface waters? YDo construction site entrances minimize street tracking? Addresses dewatering and basin draining: Is there a plan in place for dewatering so as to not cause nuisance conditions, erosion, or inundation Addresses inspections and maintenance: YIdentifies the person who will oversee the BMP inspection and maintenance? fir �w • R R. i NEWDOC NEWDOC Q 1 CITY OF CMEMSEN 7700 WU BoLtad PO Box 141 UoteMLIN55317 Administration fte952227.1100 Fax 952M.1110 Building Inspections Phone:952.2Y7.1180 tic 952227.1190 Engineering Ptbr� 1.1160 Fmc 952227.1170 Finance ft=9=7.1140 Fax 952227,1110 Park & Recreation Pharr~ %M7.1120 Fa052.227.11t0 Recreation 0erb 2310CwtaBou!wd fte 952227.1400 Fax962227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources PIM 952227,1130 Farc%ZM.ti10 Public works 1591 PA Road Phone 952.227.13W F=952.2P7.1310 Senior Center Pt m 952227.1125 Fax %W7.1110 Web Site wWw4dMN=Urus MEMORANDUM , DM - TO: Paul Oehme, Director of Public Works/City Engineer` FROM: Mak Sweidan, Engineer OA DATE: September 26, 2005 I SUBY: Approve Development Contract and Construction Plans and Specifications for Chanhassen West Business Park Project No. 05-15 (Simple Majority Vote Required) The attached development contract incorporates the conditions of approval from the. final platting and construction plans and specifications review process. Staff has calculated the required financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development contract at $705,430.00 and the administration fees total of $467,832.49 which includes all of the required SWMP :Park -Tees and Arterial Collector Fee for Lyman Boulevard. No City funds ar"e necded as part of this private development pro�ect.p The applicant has also _submiitted detailed.construction .I staff review anti Crty Councrl approval staff has revte specifications and finds the plansstill need -some nori that the City Council grant staff the .6kib lity to adnums after working with the applicant`s enifieert6 modify €he therefore recommended that.ihe construe€ion plans and West Business°Park dated Septeirilier 6, 2005, prepare and the development Cantrac_t dated September 20, 200 upon the following = 1.� The applicaptshail enter nto the development cont lane and specifications for ed the.plans:and odlfieatihns. &affrequests ratively approve the plans flans acczordinglyr Jos d.by choelI i Madson ro 5 be appved coridtio a g knglproje=\chan.west buemess park Mapprove dc.doc The City of Chanhassen • A grOti4rrg tarrgrultliiywith Clean fakes, lialdy 5ct�o0ts, a thamrsg downtovrr►,thri^Ang busir�sses, wu traits, trear�ifuf parks A q�al place fo live.work, 2rui play a CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS PARK DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT (Developer Installed Improvements) TABLE OF CONTENTS SPECIAL PROVISIONS PAGE I. REQUEST FOR PLAT APPROVAL............................................................................SP-1 2. CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL........................................................................SP-1 . 3. DEVELOPMENT PLANS............................................................................................SP-1 4. 1WROVEMENTS......................................................... ................SP-2 5. TIME OF PERFORMANCE ........................... .............................................................. SP-2 6. SECURITY....................................................................................... ... ........... .... .......... SP-2 7. NOTICE.........................................................................................................................SP-3 8. OTHER SPECIAL CONDITIONS................................................................................SP-3 9. GENERAL CONDITIONS............................................................................................SP-9 GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. RIGHT TO PROCEED............................................................... .................................. GC-1 2. PHASED DEVELOPMENT .......................................... ............................................... GC-1 3. PRELIlVIINARY PLAT STATUS ...........................................................................GC-1. 4. CHANGES IN OFFICIAL CONTROLS ................................. ..................................... GC-1 5. IMPROVEMENTS......................................................................................................GC-1 6. ,IRON MONUMENTS..............................................................................................GC-2 7. LICENSE....................................................................................................................GC-2 8. SITE EROSION CONTROL........................................................................................GC-2 8A. EROSION CONTROL DURING CONSTRUCTION OF A DWELLING OR OTHER BUILDING.................................................................................................................... GC-2 9. CLEAN UP...................................................................................................................GC-3 10. ACCEPTANCE AND OWNERSHIP OF IM[PROVEMENTS..... .............................. .GC-3 11. CLAIMS........................................................................................................................GC-3 12. PARK DEDICATION..................................................................................................GC-3 13. LANDSCAPING..........................................................................................................GC-3 14. WARRANTY...............................................................................................................GC-4 15. LOT PLANS.................................................................................................................GC-4 16. EXISTING ASSESSMENTS.......................................................................................GC-4 17. HOOK-UP CHARGES........................................................................... ...........GC-4 18. PUBLIC STREET LIGHTING.....................................................................................GC-4 19. SIGNAGE.................................................................................................... ...............GC-5 20, HOUSE PADS..............................................................................................................GC-5 21. RESPONSIBILITY FOR COSTS.................................................................................GC-5 22. DEVELOPER'S DEFAULT.........................................................................................GC-6 22. MISCELLANEOUS A. Construction Trailers........................................................................................GC-6 B. Postal Service....................................................................................................GC-6 C. Third Parties.................................................................................................GC-7 .. 1 D. Breach of Contract............................................................................................GC-7 E. Severability........................................................:..............................................GC-7 F. ' Building Permits...........................................................................,...................GC-7 G. Waivers/Amendments............................................................................:..........GC-7 H. Release..............................................................................................................GC-7 I. Insurance...........................................................................................................GC 7 J. Remedies.......................................................................................................GC-7 K. Assignability.....................................................................................................GC-8 L. Construction Hours...........................................................................................GC-8 M. Noise Amplification..........................................................................................GC-8 N. Access...............................................................................................................GC-8 O. Street Maintenance .................................. .............................. ........ ............. ....... GC-8 P. Storm Sewer Maintenance................................................................................GC-8 Q. Soil Treatment Systems....................................................................................GC-9 R. Variances..........................................................................................................GC-9 S. Compliance with Laws, Ordinances, and Regulations......................................GC-9 T. Proof of Title.....................................................................................................GC-9 U. Soil Conditions.................................................................................................GC-9 V. Soil Correction..................................................................................................GC-9 W. Haul Routes.........................................................................................................GC-10 X. Development Signs..............................................................................................GC-10 Y. Construction Plans.............................................................. .......... ............... ........GC-10 Z. As -Built Lot Surveys...........................................................................................GC-10 ll CITY OF CHANHASSEN - DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT (Developer Installed Improvements) CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS PARK SPECIAL PROVISIONS AGREEMENT dated September 29, 2005 by and between the CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the "City"), and, EDEN TRACE CORPORATION (the "Developer"): 1. Request for Plat Approval. The Developer has asked the City to approve a plat for Chanhassen West Business Park (referred to in this Contract as the "plat'). The land is legally described on the attached Exhibit "A". 2. Conditions of Plat Approval. The City hereby approves the plat on condition that the Developer enter into this Contract, furnish the security required by it, and record the plat with the County Recorder or Registrar of Titles within 30 days after the City Council approves the plat. 3. Development Plans. The plat shall be developed in accordance with the following plans. The plans shall not be attached to this Contract. With the exception of Plan A, the plans may be prepared, subject to City approval, after entering the Contract, but before commencement of any work in the plat. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Contract, the written terms shall control. The plans are: Plan A: Final plat approved September 29, 2005, prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Plan B: Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control .Plan dated September 6, 2005, prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Plan C: Plans and Specifications for Improvements dated September 6, 2005, prepared by Schoell &Madson, Inc. Plan D: Landscape Plan dated September 6, 2005, prepared by Schoell &Madson, Inc. SP-1 4. Improvements. The Developer shall install and pay for the following: A. Sanitary Sewer System B. Water System C. Storm Water Drainage System D. Streets E. Concrete Curb and Gutter F. Street Lights G. Site Grading/Restoration H. Underground Utilities (e.g. gas, electric, telephone, CAT ) I. Setting of Lot and Block Monuments J. Surveying and Staking K. Landscaping L. Erosion Control 5. Time of Performance. The Developer shall install all required improvements by November 15, 2005. The Developer may, however, request an extension of time from the City. If an extension is granted, it shall be conditioned upon updating the security posted by the Developer to reflect cost increases and the extended completion date. 6. Security. To guarantee compliance with the terms of this Contract, payment of special assessments, payment of the costs of all public improvements, and construction of all public improvements, the Developer shall furnish the City with a letter of credit in the form attached hereto, from a bank acceptable to the City, or cash escrow ("security") for $705,430.00. The amount of the security was calculated as 110% of the following: Site Grading/Restoration $ 138,000.00 Sanitary Sewer $ 46,000.00 Watermain $ 61,000.00 Storm Sewer, Drainage System, including cleaning and maintenance $ 43 200.00 Streets $ 78,000.00 Street lights and signs $ _55,200.00 Erosion control $ 18 000.00 Engineering, surveying, and inspection $� 31,900.00 Landscaping $ 1702000.00 _ SP 2 TOTAL COST OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS . $ 641,300.00 This breakdown is for historical reference; it is not a restriction on the use of the security. The security shall be subject to the approval ofthe City. The City may draw down the security, without notice, for any violation of the terms of this Contract. If the required public improvements are not completed at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the security, the City may also draw -it down. If the security is drawn down, the draw shall be used to cure the default. With City approval, the security may be reduced from time to time as financial obligations are paid, but in no case shall the security be reduced to a point less than 10% of the original amount until (1) all improvements have been completed, (2) iron monuments for lot corners have been installed, (3) all financial obligations to the City satisfied, (4) the required "record" plans have been received by the City, (5) a warranty security is provided, and (6) the public improvements are accepted by the City. 7. Notice. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the -Developer by registered mail at the following address: Eden Trace Corporation 8156 Mallory Court. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand delivered to the City Manager, or mailed to the City by registered mail in care of the City Manager `at the following address: Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317, Telephone (952) 227-1100. 8. Other Special Conditions. A. The applicant shall enter into the development contract and supply the City with a cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of $705,430.00 and pay an administration fee of $467,832.49. B. The applicant's engineer shall work with City staff in revising the construction plans to meet City standards. C. Applicant shall increase landscape plantings in the south and east property line bufferyards to meet minimum requirements. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted before final approval. D. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to any construction activities. Fencing shall remain in place until construction is completed. SP-3 E. All trees shown as preserved on plans dated 6/17105 shall be protected. Any trees damaged or removed shall be replaced at a rate of 2:1 diameter inches. F. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. G. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. H. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. I. Stable emergency overflows shall be provided for the proposed pond on site. The emergency overflows shall be clearly labeled on the plan and a detail is needed. The emergency overflows may be stabilized with a turf re -enforcement mat or fabric and riprap. J. Notes on the plan describing timing of temporary stabilization with Type 1 mulch and seed or erosion control blanket and seed shall be included. The notes shall include timing of stabilization as well as the rate of mulch application (2 tons per acre, disc anchored). K. All riprap/fabric at the flared end section shall be installed within 24 hours of flared end section installation. L. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of Slope Time (Maximum time an area can Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area 10:1 to 3:1 14 days is not actively being worked.) Flatter than 10:1 21 days These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man made systems SP-4 that discharge to a surface water. M. Erosion control blanket shall be specified in the swale from the flared end section to the wetland along the west boundary of the site. The blanket specified shall adequately protect the area from designed velocity and depth of flow. The blanket and seed in the swale-shall be installed within 5 days of culvert installation. Erosion control blanket is recommended for the pond slopes from around 952 to 942 contours. All blanket on the plan shall be shown as a shaded area. .N. Temporary sediment basins shall be installed prior to disturbing upslope areas. The areas of temporary sediment basins shall be labeled on the plan. A temporary outlet (e.g., a perforated riser and rock cone) shall be provided for the pond; details should be provided. Temporary basins shall be constructed in the area of the proposed permanent storm water pond, the southeast corner of the site prior to discharging to the culvert under Galpin:Boulevard, and possibly in the northwest area of the site to handle water runon from the north prior to discharge to the wetland. O. Any and all area inlets or drop inlets in paved areas shall be protected with alternate controls/Wimco details. The engineer shall research and provide alternate designs for Wimco- type inlet controls to fit the various types of inlets. P. Additional inlet controls shall be provided for adjacent inlets on Galpin Boulevard and Galpin Court'. Q. Silt fence shall be installed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond and the wetland. R. Type 1 and Type 2 silt fence locations shall be specified on the plan. Type 2 silt fence shall be installed around all wetland areas and in the southeast corner of the site to protect the culvert under Galpin Boulevard. The silt fence shall be extended along the south side to close the gap in the silt fence. S. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. T. The total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $301,493.29. U. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase 11 construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval. V. In lieu of parkland dedication and trail construction, full park fees shall be collected at the rate in force at the time of final plat for the proposed Chanhassen West Business Park. At SP-5 current rates, the park fee would total $359,500 (35.95 x $10,000 per acre). W. A demolition permit must be obtained before beginning demolition of any existing structures. X. A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. Y. Fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for fire protection is required to be installed. Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction except when approved altemate methods of protection are provided. Z. No burning permits will be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. AA. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed load of fire apparatus and shall be surfaced so as to provide all weather driving capabilities. Pursuant to Minnesota Fire code Section 503.2.3. BB. Temporary street signs shall be installed on street intersections when construction of a new roadway allows passage be vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota fire code Section 501.4. CC. Prior to construction, storm sewer design data will need to be submitted with drainage map for staff review. Depending on the size of the drainage area, additional catch basins may be required at that time. The storm sewer will have to be designed for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility easements will need to be dedicated on the final plat over the public storm drainage system including storm water ponds, drainage swales, emergency overflows, access routes for maintenance, over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, and buffer areas used as PVC. The minimum easement width shall be 20 feet wide. DD. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. EE. Show minimum 30-foot utility easement between Lots 4 and 5, Block 2 along the private driveway from sanitary MH 46 to MH #8. FF. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new Iots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. SP-6 GG. On the site plan: 1. Revise the cul-de-sac pavement radius to 48 feet. 2. Revise the parking driveway aisle from 24 feet to 26 feet wide. 3. Revise the public street width from 32 feet to 36 feet wide. 4. Increase the full•access width off Galpin Boulevard to 44 feet and create three lane access. 5. Shift Lots 1 and 8 easterly, access further toward the west and realign them across from each other. 6. Show at least one, 6-foot wide, side walk along the public street and pedestrian curb ramps. 7. Show the access off Galpin Boulevard turning curb radius. 8. Realign Lot 5, Block 2 access perpendicular to the shared driveway. 9. Show handicap parking spots and ramps. 10. Show concrete driveway apron at every lot access per detail #5207. HH. On the grading plan: 1. Extend silt fence between the storm pond and Outlot A. Silt fence Type 11 must be used adjacent to wetlands and storm pond. 2. Revise contour lines to match 3:1 maximum slope and tie the proposed contour lines with the existing contours for Lots 4, 5, Block 2, south of Lot 2, Block 1, and northeast of Lot 1, Block 2. 3. Show the proposed contour lines for Lot 3, Block 1. 4. Show all retaining walls top and bottom elevations. 5. Show all emergency overflows (EOF). The EOF must be 13 lower than the adjacent lowest floor. 6. Revise Lot 3, Block 1 parking slope to 0.7% minimum. 7. Add a note to remove any existing structure and access off Galpin Boulevard and Lyman Boulevard. All disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. 8. Show 75-foot minimum construction rock entrance. 9. No retaining walls structure is allowed within public street and/or public utility easements, revise accordingly. 10. Show contour lines for the berm on Outlot B. H. On the utility plans: 1. Show 20-foot proposed drainage and utility easements between Lots 2 and 3, Block 2. 2. Show the proposed sanitary and storm sewer stubs inverts. 3. Add storm sewer schedule. 4. Public storm sewer pipe type must be RCP and.15•inch minimum diameter. 5. The last street accessible storm manhole (STMH#2) must be built with a sump. 6. On the utility profile show all sewer and pipe crossings. 7. Minimum vertical separation must be 18 inches between watermain and sewer. 8. Call out watermain fittings SP-7 9. Add the outlet control structure per detail #3109. JJ. Any -retaining wall over four feet in height must be designed by a registered Civil Engineer in the state of Minnesota with an approved safety fence on top of it. Also, it will require a building permit from the Building Department. KK. Add the following City of Chanhassen latest Detail Plate Nos. 1001, 1002,1003,2109, 2110, 2201, 2204, 2205,-3104, 5201, 5205, 5214, 5215, 5216, 5217, 5221, 5232, 5240, 5241, 5242, 5302 and 5313. LL. Prior to final plat approval, a professional civil engineer registered in the state of Minnesota must sign all plans. MM. Storm pond is required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. Submit drainage calculations for staff review. NN. Cross -access easements for the shared driveway accesses must be obtained and recorded against the lots for each of the entrance derives. 00. Any off -site grading will require easements from the appropriate property owner. PP. - Public utility improvements will be required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required at the time of final platting. The applicant will also be required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. The applicant must be aware that all public utility improvements will require a preconstruction meeting before building permit issuance. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. QQ. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes and traffic control plans. The applicant should be aware that any off -site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. RR. All private streets are required to have 26-foot wide paved streets from back -of -curb to back -of -curb, be built to a 9-ton design and contained within a 40-foot wide private easement. At the completion of the project, the developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 9-ton design. SP-8 SS. All of the proposed building pads must have a rear yard elevation at least three feet above the HWL of the adjacent ponds. TT. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's Building Department. UU. Comply with Carver County memo dated June 28, 2005 and revise the plans accordingly. VV. Revise plan sheet size to 24 x 36 using scale 50. WW. The developer shall dedicate a permanent conservation easement over Outlot C. XX. The applicant shall work with staff to resolve any drainage issues along Lots 5, 6 and Outlot C. YY. The developer shall construct a berm within the 16 foot setback outside the wetland buffer zone on Lot 5. ' ZZ. Revise the construction plans to correspond with the final plat lot designations. AAA. Approval of the final plat is contingent upon approval of final construction plans/specifications for the project along with the developer entering into a development contract. with the City and supplying the necessary financial security and fees. BBB. The developer shall pay the $121,960.80 Arterial Collector Fee. CCC. The developer shall work with the City of Chaska to accommodate storm water from properties to the west of the project site," 9. General Conditions. The general conditions of this Contract are `attached as Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein. SP-9 CITY OF CI A.NMS SEN BY: Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor (SEAL) AND: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager EDEN TRACE CORPORATION: BY: Its STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20 , by Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor, and by Todd Gerhardt, City Manager, of the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF M94NESOTA } (ss- COUNTY OF } The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20.—, by NOTARY PUBLIC DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 SP-10 EXHIBIT "A" TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT LEGAL. DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: That part of the East Half'(E1/2) of the Souteast Quarter (SW1/4), Section 16, Township '116, Range 23 West, which lies South of the North 915.41 feet, westerly of the centerline of County State Aid Highway No. 19, and North of the South .100.00 feet, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the County Recorder, Carver County, Minnesota. ALSO That part of the Southwest quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 15, Township 116 North, Range 23 West, lying westerly of the centerline of the County State Aid No. 19 and northerly of the centerline of County State Aid Highway No. 18. Said property being subject to easements for roadway purposes for County State Aid Highway 19 and County State Aid Highway 18, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the County Recorder, Carver County, Minnesota. _ Excepting from the first parcel described above the.following: All that part of the South 150.00 feet of the north 1065.41 feet of the East Ralf of the Southeast Quarter of Section 16, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota lying westerly of the centerline of County State Aid Highway 19, according to the plat thereof on file or f record.in the office of the County Recorder, Carver County, Minnesota. SP-11 FEE OWNER CONSENT TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT fee owners of all or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed_ by the foregoing Development Contract, affirm and consent to the provisions thereof and agree to be bound by the provisions as the same may apply to that portion of the subject property owned by them. Dated this day of , 20 STATE OF M NFSOTA } (ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20_, by DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 NOTARY PUBLIC SP-12 MORTGAGE HOLDER CONSENT TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT , which holds a mortgage on the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract, agrees that the Development Contract shall remain in full force and effect even if it forecloses on its mortgage. Dated this day of 920 STATE OF MINNESOTA) (Ss - COUNTY OF } The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20 , by NOTARY PUBLIC DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 A SP-13 IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT No. Date: TO: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard, Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Dear Sir or Madam: We hereby issue, for the account of (Name of Developer) and in your favor, our Irrevocable Letter of Credit in the amount of S , available to you by your draft drawn on sight on the undersigned bank. The draft must: a) Bear the clause, "Drawn under Letter of Credit No. , dated , 2 , of (Name of Bank) '; b) Be signed by the Mayor or City Manager of the City of Chanhassen. c) Be presented for payment at (Address of Bank) , on or before 4:00 p.m. on November 30, 2 This Letter of Credit shall automatically renew for successive one-year terms unless, at least forty- five (45) days prior to the next annual renewal date (which shall be November 30 of each year), the Bank delivers written notice to the Chanhassen City Manager that it intends to modify the terms of, or cancel, this Letter of Credit. Written notice is effective if sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, and deposited in the U.S. Mail, at least forty-five (45) days prior to the next annual renewal date addressed as follows: Chanhassen City Manager, Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, Chanhassen, MN 55317, and is actually received by the City Manager at least thirty (30) days prior to the renewal date. This Letter of Credit sets forth in full our understanding which shall not in any way be modified, amended, amplified, or limited by reference to any document, instrument, or agreement, whether or not referred to herein. This Letter of Credit is not assignable. This is not a Notation Letter of Credit. More than one draw may be made under this Letter of Credit. This Letter of Credit shall be governed by the most recent revision of the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits, International Chamber of Commerce Publication No. 500. We hereby agree that a draft drawn under and in compliance with this Letter of Credit shall be duly honored upon presentation. mm Its SP-14 CITY OF CHANHASSEN DEVELOPIZCNT CONTRACT (Developer Installed Improvements) EXHIBIT "B" 1. Right to Proceed. Within the plat or land to be platted, the Developer may not grade or otherwise disturb the earth, remove trees, construct sewer lines, water lines, streets, utilities, public or private improvements, or any buildings until all the following conditions have been satisfied: 1) this agreement has been fully executed by both parties and filed with the City Clerk, 2) the necessary security and fees have been received by the City, 3) the plat has been recorded with the County Recorder's Office or Registrar of Title's Office of the County where the plat is located, and 4) the City Engineer has issued a letter that the foregoing conditions have been satisfied and then the Developer may proceed. 2. Phased Development. If the plat is a phase of a multiphased preliminary plat, the City may refuse to approve final plats of subsequent phases if the Developer has breached this Contract and the breach has not been remedied. Development of subsequent phases may not proceed until Development Contracts for such phases are approved by the City. Park charges and area charges for sewer and water referred to in this Contract are not being imposed on outlots, if any, in the plat that are designated in an approved preliminary plat for future subdivision into lots and blocks. Such charges will be calculated and imposed when the outlots are final platted into lots and blocks. 3. Preliminary Plat Status. If the plat is a phase of a multi -phased preliminary plat, the preliminary plat approval for all phases not final platted shall lapse and be void unless final platted into lots and blocks, not outlots, within two (2) years after preliminary plat approval. 4. Changes in Official Controls. For two (2) years from the date of this Contract, no amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan, except an amendment placing the plat in the current urban service area, or official controls shall apply to or affect the use, development density, lot size, lot layout or dedications of the approved plat unless required by state"or federal law or agreed to in writing by the City and the Developer. Thereafter, notwithstanding anything in this Contract to the contrary, to the full extent permitted by state law the City may require compliance with any amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan, official controls, platting or dedication requirements enacted after the date of this Contract. 5. improvements. The improvements specified in the Special Provisions of this Contract shall be installed in accordance with City standards, ordinances, and plans and specifications which have been prepared and signed by a competent registered professional w engineer furnished to the City and approved by the City Engineer. The Developer shall obtain all GC-1 necessary permits from the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services and other pertinent agencies before proceeding with construction. The City will, at the Developer's expense, have one or more construction inspectors and a soil engineer inspect the work on a full or part-time basis. The Developer shall also provide a qualified inspector to perform site inspections on a=daily basis. Inspector qualifications shall be submitted in writing to the City Engineer. The Developer shall instruct its project engineer/inspector to respond to questions from the City Inspector(s) and to make periodic site visits to satisfy that the construction is being performed to an acceptable level of quality in accordance with the engineer's design. The Developer or his engineer shall schedule a preconstruction meeting at a mutually agreeable time at the City Council chambers with all parties concerned, including the City staff, to review the program for the construction work. 6. Iron Monuments. Before the security for the completion of utilities is released, all monuments must be correctly placed in the ground in accordance with Minn. Stat. § 505.02, Subd. 1. The Developer's surveyor shall submit a written notice to the City certifying that the monuments have been installed. 7. License. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the plat to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the City in conjunction with plat development. 8. Site Erosion Control. Before the site is rough graded, and before any utility construction is commenced or building permits are issued, the erosion control plan, Plan B, shall be implemented, inspected, and approved by the City. The City may impose additional erosion control requirements if they would be beneficial. All areas disturbed by the excavation and backfilling operations shall be reseeded forthwith after the completion of the work in that area. Except as otherwise provided in the erosion control plan, seed shall be certified seed to provide a temporary ground cover as rapidly as possible. All seeded areas shall be fertilized, mulched, and disc anchored as necessary for seed retention. The parties recognize that time is of the essence in controlling erosion. If the Developer does not comply with the erosion control plan and schedule of supplementary instructions received from the City, the City may take such action as it deems appropriate to control erosion at the Developer's expense. The City will endeavor to notify the Developer in advance of any proposed action, but failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developer's and City's rights or obligations hereunder. No development will be allowed and no building permits will be issued unless the plat is in full compliance with the erosion control requirements. Erosion control needs to be maintained until vegetative cover has been restored, even if construction has been completed and accepted. After the site has been stabilized to where, in the opinion of the City, there is no longer a need for erosion control, the City will authorize the removal of the erosion control, i.e. hay bales and silt fence. The Developer shall remove and dispose of the erosion control measures. 8a. Erosion Control During Construction of a Dwelling or Other Building. Before a building permit is issued for construction of a dwelling or other building on a lot, a $500.00 cash escrow or letter of credit per lot shall also be furnished to the City to guarantee compliance with City Code § 20 94. GC-2 9. Clean up. The Developer shall maintain a neat and orderly work site and shall daily clean, on and off site, dirt and. debris, including blowables, from streets and the surrounding area that has resulted from construction work by the Developer, its agents or assigns. 10. Acceptance and Ownership of Improvements. Upon completion and acceptance by the City of the work and construction required by this Contract, the improvements lying within public easements_ shall become City property. After completion of the improvements, a representative of the contractor, and a representative of the Developer's engineer will make a final inspection of the work with the City Engineer. Before the City accepts the improvements, the City Engineer shall be satisfied that all work is satisfactorily completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and the Developer and his engineer shall submit a written statement to the City Engineer certifying that the project has been completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. The appropriate contractor waivers shall also be provided. Final acceptance of the public improvements shall be by City Council resolution. . 11. Claims. In the event that the City receives claims from laborers, materialmen, or others that work required by this Contract has been performed, the sums due them have not been paid, and the laborers, materialmen, or others are seeking payment out of the financial guarantees posted with the City, and if the claims are not resolved at least ninety (90) days before the security required by this Contract will expire, the Developer hereby authorizes the City to commence an Interpleader action pursuant to Rule 22, Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure for the District Courts, to draw upon the letters of credit in an amount up to 125% of the claim(s) and deposit the funds in compliance with the Rule, and upon such deposit, the Developer shall release, discharge, and dismiss the City from any further proceedings as it pertains to the letters of credit deposited with the District Court, except that the Court shall retain jurisdiction to determine attorneys' fees. 'I2. Park Dedication. The Developer shall pay full park dedication fees in conjunction with the installation of the plat improvements. The park dedication fees shall be the current amount in force at the time of final platting pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinances and City Council resolutions. 13. Landscaping. Landscaping shall be installed in accordance with Plan D. Trees which can cause a public nuisance, such as cotton producing trees, or can be a public hazard, such as bug infestation or weak bark, are prohibited. The minimum tree size shall be two and one-half (21/z) inches caliper, either bare root in season, or balled and burlapped. The trees may not be planted in the boulevard (area between curb and property line). In addition to any sod required as a' part of the erosion control plan, Plan B, the Developer or lot purchaser shall sod the boulevard area and all drainage ways on each lot utilizing a minimum of four (4) inches of topsoil as a base. Seed or sod shall also be placed on all disturbed areas of the lot. If these improvements are not in place at the time a certificate of occupancy is requested, a financial guarantee of $750.00 in the form of cash or letter of credit shall be provided to the City. These conditions must then be complied with within two (2) months after the certificate of occupancy issued, except that if the certificate of occupancy is issued between October 1 through May 1 these conditions must be complied with by GC-3 the following July 1st. Upon expiration of the time period, inspections will be conducted by City staff to verify satisfactory completion of all conditions. City staff will conduct inspections of incomplete items with a $50.00 inspection fee deducted from the escrow fund for each inspection. After satisfactory inspection, the financial guarantee shall be returned. If the requirements are not satisfied, the City may use the security to satisfy the requirements. The City may also use the escrowed funds for maintenance of erosion control pursuant to City Code Section 20-94 or to satisfy any other requirements of this Contract or of City ordinances. These requirements supplement, but do not replace, specific landscaping conditions that may have been required by the City Council for project approval. 14. Warranty. The Developer warrants all improvements required to be constructed by it pursuant to this Contract against poor material and faulty workmanship. The Developer shall submit either 1) a warranty/maintenance bond for 100% of the cost of the improvement, or 2) a letter of credit for twenty-five percent (25%) of the amount of the original cost of the improvements. A. The required warranty period for materials and workmanship for the utility contractor installing public sewer and water mains shall be two (2) years from the date of final written City acceptance of the work. B. The required warranty period for all work relating to street construction, including concrete curb and gutter, sidewalks and trails, materials and equipment shall be subject to two (2) years from the date of final written acceptance. C. The required warranty period for sod, trees, and landscaping is eighteen (18) months following acceptance by the City. 15. Lot Plans. Prior to the issuance of building permits, an acceptable Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control including silt fences, and Tree Removal Plan shall be submitted for each lot for review and approval by the City Engineer. Each plan shall assure that drainage is maintained away from buildings and that tree removal is consistent with development plans and City Ordinance. 16. - Existing Assessments. Any existing assessments against the plat will be re -spread against the plat in accordance with City standards. 17. Hook-up Charges. The Developer also acknowledges overall sanitary sewer and water trunk availability to the site and the hook-up charges established by the City as reasonable compensation for oversizing costs previously incurred, as well as, long-term maintenance. Said hook-up charges are collectible at time of building permit unless a written request is made to assess the costs over a four year term at the rates in effect at time of application. 18. Public Street Lighting. The Developer shall have installed and pay for public street lights in accordance with City standards. The public street lights shall be accepted for City GC-4 I ownership and maintenance at the same time that the public street is accepted for ownership and maintenance.. A plan shall be submitted for the City Engineer's approval prior to the installation. Before the City signs the final plat, the Developer shall pay the City a fee of $300.00 for each street light installed in the plat. The fee shall be used by the City for furnishing electricity and N maintaining each public street light for twenty,(20) months. Any upgrade to City standard lights, monthly operation and maintenance fee charges shall be paid by the developer. 19. Signage. All street signs, traffic signs, and wetland_ monumentation required by the City as a part of the plat shall be furnished and installed by the City at the sole expense of the Developer. 20. House Pads. The Developer shall promptly furnish the City "as -built" plans indicating the amount, type and limits of fill on any house pad location. 21. Responsibility for Costs. A. The Developer shall pay an administrative fee in conjunction with the installation of the plat improvements. This fee is to cover the cost of City Staff time and overhead for items such as review of construction documents, preparation of the Development. Contract, monitoring construction progress, processing pay requests, processing security reductions, and final acceptance of improvements. This fee does not cover the City's cost for construction inspections. The fee shall be calculated as follows: i) if the cost of the construction of public improvements is less than $500,000, three percent (3%) of construction costs; it) if the cost of the construction of public improvements is between $500,000 and $1,000,000, three percent (301o) of construction costs for the first $500,000 and two percent (201o) of construction costs over $500,000; if the cost of the construction of public improvements is over $1,000,000, two and one-half perccent. (21/2%) of construction costs for the first $1,000,000 and one and one-half percent (1'/2%) of construction costs over$1,000,000. Before the City signs the final plat, the Developer shall deposit with the City a fee based upon construction estimates. After construction is completed, the final fee shall be determined based upon actual construction costs. The cost of public improvements is defined in paragraph, 5 of the Special Provisions. B. In addition to the administrative fee, the Developer shall reimburse the City for all costs incurred by the City for providing construction inspections. This cost will be periodically GC-5 billed directly to the Developer based on the actual progress of the construction. Payment shall be due in accordance with Article 20E of this Agreement. C. The Developer shall hold the City and its officers and employees harmless from claims made by itself and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from plat approval and development. The Developer shall indemnify the City and its officers and employees for all casts, damages, or expenses which the City may pay or incur in consequence of such claims, including attomeys' fees. D. In addition to the administrative fee, the Developer shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the enforcement of this Contract, including engineering and attorneys' fees. E. The Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City for obligations incurred under this Contract within thirty (30) days after receipt. If the bills are not paid on time, the City may halt all plat development work and construction, including but not limited to the issuance of building permits for lots which the Developer may or may not have sold, until the bills are paid in full. Bills not paid within thirty (30) days shall accrue interest at the rate of 8% per year. F. In addition to the charges and special assessments referred to herein, other charges and special assessments may be imposed such as, but not limited to, sewer availability charges ("SAC"), City water connection charges, City sewer connection charges, and building permit fees. G. Private Utilities. The Developer shall have installed and pay for the installation of electrical, natural gas, telephone, and cable television service in conjunction with the overall development improvements. These services shall be provided in -accordance with each of the respective franchise agreements held with the City. H. The developer shall pay the City a fee established by City Council resolution, to reimburse the City for the cost of updating the City's base maps, GIS data base files, and converting the plat and record drawings into an electronic format. 22. Developer's Default. In the event of default by the Developer as to any of the work to be performed by it hereunder, the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City, provided the Developer is first given notice of the work in default, not less than four (4) days in advance. This Contract is a license for the City to act, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek a Court order for permission to enter the land. When the City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, assess the cost in whole or in part. -- 23. Miscellaneous. A. Construction Trailers. Placement of on -site construction trailers and temporary job site offices shall be approved by the City Engineer as apart of the pre -construction meeting for { GC-6 installation of public improvements. Trailers shall be removed from the subject property within thirty (30) days following the acceptance of the public improvements unless otherwise approved by. the City Engineer. B. Postal Service. The Developer shall provide for the maintenance of postal service in accordance with the local Postmaster's request. C. Third Parties. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this Contract. The City is not a guarantor of the Developer's obligations under this Contract. The City shall have no responsibility or liability to lot purchasers or others for the City's failure to enforce this Contract or for allowing deviations from it. D. Breach of Contract. Breach of the terms of this Contract by the Developer shall be grounds for denial of building permits, including lots sold to third parties. The City may also issue a stop work order halting all plat development until the breach has been cured and the City has received satisfactory assurance that the breach will not reoccur. E. Severability. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph, or phrase of this Contract is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Contract. F. Building Permits. Building permits will not be issued in the plat until sanitary sewer, watermain, and storm sewer have been installed, tested, and accepted by the City, and the streets needed for access have been paved with a bituminous surface and the site graded and revegetated in accordance with Plan B of the development plans. G. Waivers/Amendments. The action or inaction of the City shall not. constitute a waiver or amendment to the provisions of this Contract. To be binding, amendments or waivers shall be in writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City's failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Contract shall not be a waiver or release. .H: Release. This Contract shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the property. After the Developer has completed the work required of it under this Contract, at the Developer's request the City Manager will issue a Certificate of Compliance. � Prior to the issuance of such a certificate, individual lot owners may make as written request for a certificate applicable to an individual lot allowing a minimum of ten (10) days for processing. I. Insurance. Developer shall take out and maintain until six (6) months after the City has accepted the public improvements, public liability and property damage insurance covering personal injury, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise out of Developer's work or the work of its subcontractors or by one directly or indirectly employed by any of them. Limits for bodily injury and death shall be not less than $500,000 for one person and $1,000,000 for each occurrence; limits for property damage shall be not less than $500,000 for each GC-7 occurrence; or a combination single limit policy of $1,000,000 or more. The City shall be named as an additional insured on the policy, and the Developer shall file with the City a certificate evidencing coverage prior to the City signing the plat. The certificate shall provide that the City must be given ten (10) days advance written notice of the cancellation of the insurance. The certificate may not contain any disclaimer for failure to give the required notice. - J. Remedies. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative and in addition to every other right, power or remedy, expressed or implied, now or hereafter arising, available to City, at Iaw or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised from time to time as often and in such order as may be deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the right to exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or remedy. K. Assignability. The Developer may not assign this Contract without the written permission of the City Council. The Developer's obligation hereunder shall continue in full force and effect even if the Developer sells one or more lots, the entire plat, or any part of it. L. Construction Hours. Construction hours for required improvements under this contract shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays with no such activity allowed on Sundays or any recognized legal holidays. Under emergency conditions, this limitation may be waived by the consent of the City Engineer. Any approved work performed after dark shall be adequately illuminated. If construction occurs outside of the permitted construction hours, the Developer shall pay the following administrative penalties: First violation Second violation Third & subsequent violations $ 500.00 $ 1,000.00 AU site development and construction must cease for seven (7) calendar days M. Noise Amplification. The use of outdoor loudspeakers, bullhorns, intercoms, and similar devices is prohibited in conjunction with the construction of homes, buildings, and the improvements required under this contract. The administrative penalty for violation of construction hours shall also apply to violation of the provisions in this paragraph. N. Access, All access to the plat prior to the City accepting the roadway improvements shall be the responsibility of the Developer regardless if the City has issued building permits or occupancy permits for lots within the plat. O. Street Maintenance. The Developer shall be responsible for all street maintenance until streets within the plat are accepted by the City. Warning signs shall be placed by the Developer when hazards develop in streets to prevent the public from traveling on same and directing attention to detours. If streets become impassable, the City may order that such streets shall be barricaded and closed. The Developer shall maintain a smooth roadway surface and provide proper surface drainage. The Developer may request, in writing, that the City plow snow GC-8 on the streets prior to final acceptance of the streets. The City shall have complete discretion to approve or reject the request. The City shall not be responsible for reshaping or damage to the street base or utilities because of snow plowing operations. The provision of City snow plowing service does not constitute final acceptance of the streets by the City. - P. Storm Sewer Maintenance. The Developer shall be responsible for cleaning and maintenance of the storm sewer system (including ponds, pipes, catch basins, culverts and swales) within the plat and the adjacent off -site storm sewer system that receives storm water from the plat. The Developer shall follow all instructions it receives from the City concerning the cleaning and maintenance of the storm sewer system. The Developer's obligations under this paragraph shall end two (2). years after the public street and storm drainage improvements in the plat have been accepted by the City. Twenty percent (2001o) of the storm sewer costs, shown under section 6 of the special provisions of this contract, will be held by the City for the duration of the 2-year maintenance period. Q. Soil Treatment Systems. If soil treatment systems are required, the Developer shall clearly identify in the field and protect from alteration, unless suitable alternative sites are first provided, the two soil treatment sites identified during the platting process for each lot. This shall be done prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. Any violation/disturbance of these sites shall render them as unacceptable and replacement sites will need to be located for each violated site in order to obtain a building permit. R. Variances. By approving the plat, the Developer represents that all lots in the plat are buildable without the need for variances from the City's ordinances. S. Compliance with Laws, Ordinances, and Regulations. In the development of the plat the Developer shall comply with all laws, ordinances, and regulations of the following authorities: 1. City of Chanhassen; 2. State of Minnesota, its agencies, departments and commissions; 3. United States Army Corps of Engineers; 4. Watershed District(s); S. Metropolitan Government, its agencies, departments and commissions. T. Proof of Title. Upon request, the Developer shall furnish the City with evidence satisfactory to the City that it has the authority of the fee owners and contract for deed purchasers to enter into this Development Contract. U. Soil Conditions. The Developer acknowledges that the City makes no representations or warranties as to the condition of the soils on the property or, its fitness for construction of the improvements or any other purpose for which the Developer may make use of such property. The Developer further agrees that it will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City, its governing body members, officers, and employees from any claims or actions arising out of GC-9 the presence, if any, of hazardous wastes or pollutants on the property, unless hazardous wastes or pollutants were caused to be there by the City. V. Soil Correction. The Developer shall be responsible for soil correction work on the property. The City makes no representation to the Developer concerning the nature of suitability of soils nor the cost of correcting any unsuitable soil conditions which may exist. On lots which have no fill material a soils report from a qualified soils engineer is not required unless the City's building inspection department determines from observation that there may be a soils problem. On lots with fill material -that have been mass graded as part of a multi-Iot grading project, a satisfactory soils report from a qualified soils engineer shall be provided before the City issues a building permit for the lot. On lots with fill material that have been custom graded, a satisfactory soils report from a qualified soils engineer shall be provided before the City inspects the foundation for a building on the lot. W. Haul Routes. Bluff Creek Drive from Trunk Highway 212 to Pioneer Trail (CSAH 14) may not be used by the Developer, the Developer's contractors or subcontractors as a haul route for the import or export of soil, construction material, construction equipment or construction debris, or any other purpose. X. Development -Signs. The Developer shall post a six foot by eight foot development sign in accordance with City Detail Plate No. 5313 at each entrance to the project. The sign shall be in place before construction of the required improvements commences and shall be removed when the required improvements are completed, except for the final lift of asphalt on streets. The signs shall contain the following information: project name, name of developer, developer's telephone number and designated contact person, allowed construction hours. Y. Construction Plans. Upon final plat approval, the developer shall provide the City with two complete sets of full-size construction plans and four sets of 11"x17" reduced construction plan sets and three sets of specifications. Within sixty (60) days after the completion of the utility improvements and base course pavement and before the security is released, the Developer shall supply the City with the following: (1) a complete set of reproducible Mylar as -built plans, (2) two complete full-size sets of blue line/paper as -built plans, (3) two complete sets of utility tie sheets, (4) location of buried fabric used for soil stabilization, (5) location stationing and swing ties of all utility stubs including draintile cleanouts,' (6) bench mark network, (7) digital file of as -built plans in both Axf & .tif format (the .dxf file must be tied to the current county coordinate system), and (8) digital file of utility tie sheets in either .doc or .tif format. The Developer is required to submit the final plat in electronic format. Z. As -Built Lot Surveys. An as -built lot survey will be required on all lots prior to the Certificate of Occupancy being issued. The as -built lot survey must be prepared, signed, and dated by a Registered Land Surveyor. Rev, MI/04 GC 10 } CITY OF CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS PARK PROJECT NO.05-15 Y BREAKDOWN OF ADMINISTRATION FEES - 9119/05 Based on $471,300 of Estimated Public Improvements $ 471,300.00 3% of Public Improvement Costs (up to $500,000) $ 14,139.00 Street lighting°Charge (for electricity) 10 Light(s) @ $300.00 $ 3,000.00 c Final Plat Process (Attorney Fee for Review of Plat and '$ 450-00 Development Contract) _ Recording Fees a. Development Contract $ 50.00 b. Plat Filing $ 50.00 c. Conservation Easement $ 50.00 d. Driveway Easement $ 50.00 Park Fees = 40.15 Acres @ $100011ot $ ` 40,150.00 Surface Water Management $ 301,493.29 GIS Fee ($25/plat and $10/parcel) $ 105.00 Arterial Collector Fees $108,295.20 - TOTAL ADMINISTRATION FEES $ 467,832.49 f ChanWestBusR.FEE w�■n MM== ■arwwtii.� �w m- NEWCLIP Ililllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll os-ate 0 CITY OF CHONSFN 7700Ivtatke! Bouieed PO Box 147 WKISM MN5217 Administration Ptrorr %2227.1100 t ax 952.227.1110 Building Inspections Mm 9=.1180 Fa)c %2.227.1190 Engineering Phae 952227,1160 F=952.227.1170 Finance K=952.227.1140 Fax 952227.11I D Park & Recreation 1952.227.1120 Fax 952.227,1110 Reae m CWV 2310 Comer BWvard Pfine W227.1400 Fm 952.227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources ftwe 952.227.1130 Fax:952227.1110 Public works 1591 ParkRosd Mm 952227.In Fu %Z227.131D Senior Center Hm 952227.1125 Fax 952227.1110 Web Site www.cidrWtWZ1Mus MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager FROM: Bob Generous, Senior Planner DATE: August 8, 2005 SUBJ: Chanhassen West Business Park — PC #05-23 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 The applicant is proposing an office -industrial Planned Unit Development (PUD). Specifically, they are requesting that the property be rezoned from Agricultural Estate to Planned Unit Development, incorporating the design standards contained in the Planning Commission staff report on pages 4 through 10. Additionally, they are requesting preliminary plat approval to create eight lots, three outlots and right- of-way for a public street, and a wetland alteration permit to grade and fill wetlands on site. Each lot will appear before that Planning Commission and City Council for site plan review. Staff recommended that the developer proceed through the.PUD in order to preserve more of the existing site vegetation than would have been possible under a straight Industrial Office Park (10P) development. The developer.is preserving a 3.8 acre site, Outlot C, as permanent open space within the center of the project. They are also proposing the use of a private street to access Lots 4 and 5 which will permit additional tree preservation. Along the eastern perimeter of the site, they are preserving existing vegetation within 50 feet of the property line. The applicant has saved a large portion of the existing mature oaks on site. This preservation will add a unique feel to the site and provide the residential neighborhood to the north an added buffer for the development. The applicant did an excellent job fitting the design to the site. Staff has prepared the design standards and setbacks recommendations based on the adequacy of the proposed, buffering; as per city code. The neighbors were concerned about the height and bulk of the buildings within the development and how the transition will be handled, specifically on Lot 6. This shall be handled through setbacks, elevation changes, and landscaping. It should be noted that the proposed finished floor elevation for Lot 6 is 17 feet lower than Galpin Boulevard and that all the existing trees within 50 feet of the right-of-way will be preserved. In the middle of Lot 8, the proposed finished floor elevation of the building is nine feet lower than Galpin Boulevard. The proposed finished floor elevation of Lot 1. is six feet higher than Galpin Boulevard. The City of Chanhassen • Agrowing community with dean Wes. quality sd=ls. a c Trarq dowrdM [curving twsirsesses, winding traits, and WaVul parks. A geat puce to live, work, and play, L Executive Summary Chanhassen West Business Park August 8, 2005 Page 2 Staff is working with the developer to see if the proposed final grade for Lot 1 can be lowered. This may eliminate the retaining wall between Lots 1 and 2. Additionally, the applicant has agreed to revise their landscape plan to incorporate additional landscaping on the north and east property lines. While staff has prepared design standards that would permit building heights of three stories and 40 feet, which is less than the four stories and 50 feet permitted in the IOP district; City Council could revise the design standards for building heights for Lots 1, 6 and 8 to two stories and 30 feet to address neighbors' concerns and yet provide the developer with reasonable building parameters for those lots. ACTION REQUIRED City Council approval requires a majority vote of City Council present. PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY The Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 18, 2005, to review the proposed development. The Planning Commission voted 3 to 2 to approve the proposed project with modifications to the conditions of approval as follows: 54. Follow the city code and have a 150 foot setback on the northeast corner abutting Lot 6. 55. No motels/hotels be allowed. 56. The combination of the berm height, landscaping and the height of the building on Lot 6 be such that you cannot see the roof line while standing on the ground on Lot 2 of Trotters Ridge. 57. The applicant work with city staff to resolve any drainage issues with Lot 2 in Trotters Ridge. 58. City staff be directed to revisit the issue of access from the site onto Lyman Boulevard with Carver County. (The Planning Commission minutes for July 19, 2005 are item la of the City Council packet for August 8, 2005.) Staff believes that the recommended 100-foot setback/buffer for the north development perimeter complies with city code and satisfies the buffering requirement, which states: "In instances where existing topography and/or vegetation provide buffering satisfactory to the city, or where quality site GAPLAM2005 Ptann➢ng Cascs\05.23 Chanhassen West Business ParMExecutive Summary Clan W Business Pk doc L Executive Summary Chanhassen West Business Park August 8, 2005 Page 3 planning is achieved, the city may reduce buffer yard requirements by up to 50 percent. The applicant shall have the full burden of demonstrating compliance with the standards herein" The applicant has agreed to provide additional landscaping and berming within the 100-foot setback; therefore, condition 54 is not being recommended by staff for inclusion as a condition of approval. Additionally, the applicant is proposing the creation of Outlot C, which will preserve a significant stand of mature trees. If additional perimeter setbacks are required, then the applicant may have to encroach into this area to "make up" for the lost developable area. Staff has modified the design standards to delete hotels/motels as uses within the PUD, which will be incorporated into the rezoning ordinance. Therefore, condition 55 is not necessary. Condition 56 is addressed by the design standards. Staff has analyzed the resulting height configuration and determined that assuming a person six feet tall and a berm six feet tall with a slope of 3:1 planted with a six-foot conifer, the permitted building height at the 100 foot setback would be 39.33 feet. The design standards permit a maximum building height of 40 feet. Condition 57 has been added, as condition 54, to permit the applicant and staff to work out the drainage as it relates to the ultimate berming in this area. Condition 58 is a directive to staff and not a condition of approval for the developer. Staff has re -contacted Carver County regarding access to Lyman Boulevard. Galpin Boulevard and Lyman Boulevard are classified as arterial roadways in the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plans and are under the jurisdiction of Carver County. SRF Consulting Group, Inc., the City's traffic consultant, completed a city-wide traffic analysis with the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. Traffic volumes on arterial and collector roads within the city were estimated based on the zoning and land use. The proposed land use for Chanhassen Business Park West is consistent with that shown in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan traffic analysis; therefore a site -specific traffic analysis was not required for this development. Carver County has stated that the site access must be at Galpin Boulevard. Staff supports the proposed site access for the following reasons: 1. The access would align at an existing intersection to Galpin Boulevard (at Stone Creek Drive). GAPLAN12005 PlanningCases105.23 Cf=has= West Business Park\Executive Summary Chan W Business Pk.doc 0 0 Executive Summary Chanhassen West Business Park August S, 2005 Page 4 2. Galpin is currently a 52-foot wide street with right turn lanes for both north and south bound traffic at the intersection of Stone Creek Drive, the proposed site access to Chanhassen Business Park West. 3. Carver County has identified Lyman Boulevard as an east -west arterial corridor with higher traffic volumes than Galpin Boulevard. Access to arterial corridor roadways must be limited to maintain traffic movement within the corridor. Due to the existing full intersections nearest to the site--Galpin Boulevard and Norex Drive (to the west at Chaska"s industrial park) —full access to Chanhassen Business Park West would compromise the effectiveness of Lyman Boulevard as an east -west corridor. 4. An access at Lyman Boulevard would not meet either of the City's criteria for access to an arterial road (i.e. accesses shall be spaced a minimum t/a-mile and align with an existing intersection). Residents suggested that a public street be extended to the west through Chaska's industrial park. This is not a feasible option due to the grade differential between the existing industrial buildings. Additionally, this area is not a public street. It is owned by two private parties. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the motions, beginning on page 19, as specified in the staff report dated July 19, 2005. ATTACHMENTS 1. Ordinance. Rezoning Property to PUD 2. Reduced Copy Preliminary Plat 3. Email from Alyson Morns to jmurray dated 813105 4. Bus Stop Location Map 5. Email from Steve Dale to Mayor Furlong dated July 25, 2005 6. Letter from Sonya A. Benkstein to the City Council (not dated) 7. Email from Peggy Emerson to the City Council dated August 2, 2005 8. Email from Mary & Bary LaBounty to the City Council dated July 25, 2005 9. Email from Helen Hollands to the City Council dated July 21, 2005 10. Email from Bill Rodriquez to the City Council dated August 1, 2005 11. Email from Rick & Chrysauna Buan to Mayor Furlong dated July 31, 2005 12. Email from Kelly & Sara Morlock to the City Council dated July 26, 2005 13. Email from Thor Smith to Bob Generous dated July 21, 2005 14. Letter from Joel Lehrke to Planning Commission dated July 19, 2005 GA1PLAN\2005 Planning Cases\05.23 Chanhassen West Business Park\Exxu&c Sum=ry Cl= W Blueness Pk.doc ummary Chanhassen West Business Park August 8, 2005 Page 5 15. Letter from LuAnn Sidney to Planning Commissioner Sacchet dated July 15, 2005 ld. better from Christine and Mark Fischer to Planning Commission dated July 15, 2005 17. Email from Alyson Morris to Bob Generous dated July 15, 2005 18. Email from Kelly & Sara Morlock to Mark Uhdestad dated July 13, 2005 19. Email from Alyson Moms to Bill Weckman dated July 12, 2005 20. Memo from Paul Moline to Robert Generous dated duly 8, 2005 21. Planning Commission Staff Report Dated July .19, 2005 GAPLANCOO5 Planning Cases\05-23 Chanhassen West Business Park\Executive Sumrnary Chan W Business Pkdoc 11 L CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS PARK (DRAFI) DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS Staff is proposing the following development standards govern the development of the property. Development Standards a. Intent The purpose of this zone is to create a PUD light industrial/office park. The use of the PUD zone is to allow for more flexible design standards while creating a higher quality and more sensitive proposal. All utilities are required to be placed underground. Each lot proposed for development shall proceed through site plan review based on the development standards outlined below. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. Ancillary uses may be permitted as listed below once a primary use has occupied the site. Shared parking may be used within the development. b. Permitted Uses The permitted uses in this zone shall be limited to light industrial, warehousing, and office as defined below. The uses shall be limited to those as defined herein. if there is a question as to whether or not a use meets the definition, the Community Development Director shall make that interpretation. . Light Industrial The manufacturing, compounding, processing, assembling, packaging, or testing of goods or equipment or research activities entirely within an enclosed. structure. There shall be negligible impact upon the surrounding environment by noise, vibration, smoke, dust or pollutants. Conferences/Convention Center - establishments designed to accommodate people in assembly, providing conference and meeting services to individuals, groups, and organizations. Contractor yard - means any area or use of land where vehicles, equipment, and/or construction materials and supplies commonly used by building, excavation, roadway construction, landscaping and similar contractors are stored or serviced. A contractor's yard includes both areas of outdoor storage and areas confined within a completely enclosed buildings used in conjunction with a contractor's business. Must comply with the following standards: (1) Equipment and supply storage must be screened or enclosed. Screening shall comply with Buffer Yard D and F4 Fencing as specified in Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code.. (2) Vehicles/Equipment shall be stored within an enclosed or screened area. (3) No unlicensed or inoperable vehicle/equipment shall be stored on premises. (4) All chemicals shall be stored in proper storage facilities, specified by OSHA regulations. (5) The contractor shall be Licensed, Bonded and Insured Day Care - establishments providing for the care and supervision of infants and children on a daily basis. The following applies to Day care centers: (1) The site shall have loading and drop off points designed to avoid interfering with traffic and pedestrian movements. (2) Outdoor play areas shall be located and designed in a manner which mitigates visual and noise impacts on adjoining residential areas. (3) Each center shall obtain all applicable state, county, and city licenses. Health Services- establishments primarily engaged in furnishing medical, surgical and other health services to persons. Office - Professional and business office. RecreationlHealth Club - establishments engaged in operating reducing and other health clubs, spas, and similar facilities featuring exercise and other physical fitness conditioning. Research Laboratory- establishments engaged.in scientific research or study. Must comply with the following standards: (1) All chemicals and pollutants and waste must be stored, used and disposed of according to OSHA and Hazmat regulations and standards. (2) The building must be secure from persons other than laboratory personnel. 2 0 (3) No outdoor experiments that cause hazards or excessive noise or odors shall be permitted on site. Utility services Warehousing - Means the commercial storage of merchandise and personal property. Ancillary Uses (in conjunction with and integral to a primary use) Antennas Screened outdoor storage - Outside storage is permitted, if approved by the City Council as part of the site plan review, subject to being completely screened with 100 percent opaque fence and/or landscape screening. Showroom - showroom type display area for products stored or manufactured on -site provided that no more than 20 percent of the floor space is used for such display and sales. Telecommunication Towers by conditional use permit only. Prohibited uses • Auto related including sales and repair • Churches • Garden Center • Home furnishings and equipment stores • Home Improvement/Building Supply • Lumber Yard _ • Retail • Outdoor speakers or public address systems C. Setbacks The development is regulated by the PUD Standards. There are no minimum requirements for setbacks on interior lot lines in the PUD zone, except as specified below. The following setbacks shall apply: In the PUD standards, there is the requirement for landscape buffering in addition to building and parking setbacks. The following building and parking setbacks shall apply: Buffer yard, Setback building/parking (ft.) Error?.Bookmark not defined.Galpin C, 50,50 3 rr r--rrr Blvd. Lyman Blvd. C, 50, 50 Street A NA, 30, 10 Interior Lot Lines B, 0, 0 West Perimeter'Lot Line (adjacent to industrial) C, 30,20 NoPerimeter Lot Line (adjacent to residerth ntial): Buffer yard & setback D, 100, 100 No fences shall be permitted between the required landscape buffer and arterial and collector roads. The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 70% for office and industrial uses. Any one site/lot can exceed the 70 percent requirement, but in no case can the entire finished development exceed 70 percent. d. Development Standards Tabulation Box 1. Building Area Building Square Footage Breakdown Use Percent Total Square Feet Office 30% 105,000 Light Industrial /Warehouse 70% 245,000 Total (Maximum) 350,000 The actual use percentages and square footage totals may vary provided that the total building square footages are not exceeded. 2. More than one (1) principal structure may be placed on one (1) platted lot. 3. Building height shall be limited to 3 stories or4 feet, except for Lot 5, Block 2 (lot 5) and Lot 3, Block 1. (lot 6) which shall have a building height limit of 2 stories and 30 feet, including parapet. e. Building Materials and Design 1. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. 4 2. All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Masonry or higher quality material shall be used. Color shall be introduced through colored block or panels and not painted cinder block. 3. Brick may be used and must be approved to assure uniformity. 4. Block shall have a weathered face or be polished, fluted, or broken face. 5. Concrete may be poured in place, tilt -up or pre -cast, and shall be finished in stone, textured, coated, or painted. 6. Metal siding will not be approved except as support material to one of the above materials or curtain wall on office components or, as trim or as HVAC screen., 7. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with the primary structure. 8. All roof mounted equipment shall be screened from adjacent public right-of-ways by walls of compatible appearing material or camouflaged to blend into the building or background. Wood screen fences are prohibited. All exterior process machinery, tanks, etc., are to be fully screened by compatible materials. 9. The use of large unadorned, concrete panels and concrete block, or a solid wall unrelieved by architectural detailing, such as change in materials, change in color, fenestrations, or other significant visual relief provided in a manner or at intervals in keeping with the size, mass, and. scale of the wall and its views from public ways shall be prohibited. Acceptable materials will incorporate textured surfaces, exposed aggregate and/or other patterning. All walls shall be given added architectural interest through building design or appropriate landscaping. The buildings shall have varied and interesting detailing. 10. Space for recycling shall be provided in the interior of all principal structures or within an enclosure for each lot developed in the Business Park. 1.1 Each buildings shall contain one or more pitched roof elements depending on scale and type of building, or other architectural treatments such as towers, arches, vaults, entryway projections, canopies and detailing to add additional interest and articulation to structures. 12. There shall be no underdeveloped sides of buildings visible from public right-of- ways. All elevations visible from the streetshall receive nearly equal treatment and visual qualities. f. Site Landscaping and Screening 1. Landscaping along Lyman and Galpin Boulevards shall comply with buffer yard standard C. Landscaping along the northern project perimeter shall comply with buffer M yard D. Landscaping along the westerly project perimeter shall comply with buffer yard B. All buffer yard plantings shall be installed as part of the subdivision. Each lot must present a landscape plan for approval with the site plan review process. 2.. Storage of material outdoors is prohibited unless it has been approved under site plan review. All approved outdoor storage must be screened with berms, masonry fences and/or landscaping. 3. When parking lots are less than three feet above the adjacent roadway, an undulating or angular berm or elevation change of three feet or more in height shall be installed. All required boulevard landscaping shall be sodded. 4. Loading areas shall be screened 100 percent year round from public right-of-ways. Wing walls may be required where deemed appropriate. g. Signage I. The Chanhassen West Business Park PUD shall be permitted one project identification sign at the entrance on Galpin Boulevard. The sign shall not exceed eight feet in height. A maximum of 80 square feet of sign area shall be permitted. The project identification sign shall not be counted against the permitted signage on an individual parcel. 2. All freestanding parcel signs shall be limited to monument signs. The sign shall not exceed eighty (80) square feet. in sign display area nor be greater than eight (8) feet in height, 3. Each property shall be allowed one monument sign per street frontage. 4. The signage will have consistency throughout the development. A common theme will be introduced at the development's entrance monument and will be used throughout. The sign treatment is an element of the architecture and thus should reflect the quality of the development. The signs should be consistent in color, size, and material throughout the development. 5. Wall sign shall be permitted per city ordinance for industrial office park site. 6. All signs shall require a separate sign permit. 7. Lighted signs, which are illuminated either internally or externally, are prohibited. h. Lighting 1. Lighting for the interior of the business center should be consistent throughout the development. 2. A decorative, shoe box fixture (high pressure sodium vapor lamps) with a square ornamental pole shall be used throughout the development area for area lighting. 3. Lighting equipment similar to what is mounted in the public street right-of-ways shall be used in the private areas. 4. All light fixtures shall be shielded. Light level for site lighting shall be no more than 1/2 candle at the property line. This does not apply to street lighting. 5. Site lighting shall be directed toward the interior of individual lots. i. Alternative Access 1. Each site shall accommodate transit service within the individual development, whenever possible. 2. Pedestrian access shall be provided from each site to the public sidewalk and trail system. 3. The developer and site users shall promote and encourage Traffic Demand Management Strategies. 4. Each site shall provide areas for bicycle parking and storage. 5. Preferential parking shall be provided for car and van pool vehicles within each site. 7 Generous, Bob From: Morris, Alyson Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 200510:30 AM, To: 'jmurray@labrechemurray.com' Cc: Oehme, Paul; Generous, Bob; Aanenson, Kate; Gerhardt, Todd Subject: Chanhassen West Business Park Mr. Murray, My name is Alyson Morris and I'm the Assistant City Engineer in Chanhassen. Thank you for your question regarding access to this project. Below is a response to the residents' traffic concerns: • Both Galpin Boulevard and Lyman Boulevard are County roads, therefore the County has jurisdiction regarding access locations. Both roads are intended to be used by all vehicle types. • The County has identified Lyman Boulevard as an east -west arterial corridor with higher traffic volumes than Galpin Boulevard. Access to arterial corridor roadways must be limited to maintain traffic movement within the corridor. Due to the existing full intersections nearest to the site- Galpin Boulevard and Norex Drive (to the west at Chaska's industrial park), full access to Chanhassen Business Park West would compromise the effectiveness of Lyman Boulevard as an east -west corridor, therefore the County has stated that access to this site shall be from Galpin. • Galpin and Lyman are classified as A -Minor Expander Arterials. City Code Section 18.57 (1) states that "To the extent feasible access to arterial streets shall be at intervals of not less than one-fourth mile (1320 ft] and through existing and established crossroads.". The existing accesses to Lyman in this area- Galpin and Norex Avenue- are approximately 1900 ft (0.36 miles) apart, therefore any additional access to Lyman Boulevard between these streets would not meet City Code. Due to wetland conditions, any access from the site to Lyman Boulevard would be 1,000 feet west of Galpin Boulevard. • Access from Galpin at the Stone Creek Drive intersection satisfies the "through existing and established crossroads' condition of the City Code. - • Staff looked at extending a public road to the west, connecting to Norex Avenue in Chaska, as suggested at the Planning Commission meeting. This is not feasible due to the significant grade difference between the existing buildings. • A city-wide traffic analysis was completed with the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan. The proposed project is consistent with the land use used to generate the projected traffic volumes shown in the 2020 Plan. • The 2003 traffic volume on the south end of Galpin was 3,100 vehicles per day (vpd) and 7,800 vpd on Lyman. The County's projected 2010 traffic volume on Galpin is 5,500 vpd and 9,000 vpd on Lyman. The site access on Galpin is preferred since the existing and projected traffic volumes are lower than that of Lyman. • Carver County recognizes the potential need for a signalized intersection at Galpin and Lyman and is identified in the County's 5-year Capital Improvement Plan. A signal will not be installed until the warrants, or "justifying conditions" as defined by the Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices are met. If you have any other questions please call me at 952-227-1164. Cordially, Alyson Morris Assistant City Engineer City of Chanhassen M- 0 0 0 1'1�111 Generous, Bob From: Gerhardt, Todd Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 8:42 AM To: Aanenson, Kate; Generous, Bob Subject: FW: Re: Development at Galpin & Lyman Fallow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged -----Original Message ----- From: Tom Furlong (mailto:tfurlong@apexfsi.com) Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 8:49 AM To: Gerhardt, Todd Subject: FW: Re: Development at Galpin & Lyman ---original. Message ----- From: STEVE.DALE@usbank.com (mailto:STEVE.DALE@usbank.comj Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 4:35 PM To: tfurlong@ci.ehanhassen.mn.us Subject: Mayor Tom Furlong, I hope you have cooled off from Webelo Camp a couple of weeks ago. I think all the boys in our Pack had a great time and actually learned a few things. Now for the big issue at hand for the Trotters Ridge subdivision -- the proposed development at the corner of Lyman and Galpin Blvd. (which I mentioned briefly when we were at camp, but thought it inappropriate to discuss). As you can imagine it is an issue that: has quite a few people talking in our neighborhood and in Stone Creek, as well. To give you a better grasp of the situation and why we are upset about the whole issue 1 am inviting you.to come and see for yourself. My wife and I, along with our two children, :reside at 2487 Bridle Creek Trail, and welcome you to come to our home at your convenience to see how this development will change our lives, our neighborhood and possibly the value of our property. Please contact me either via email or phone to set up this meeting. My email addresses are office. - steve.dale@usbank.com (612) 303-0784 or home - ss.dale@worldnet.att.net (952) 448-5574. Recognizing how rough scheduling can be for all of us, please note that while l work in downtown Minneapolis, my wife works out of our home and could show you how we think the development will negatively impact our property during the day. Hopefully, you can drop by one evening prior to the Aug. 8th Council meeting to see what our neighbors and our family are worried about. We will be sending you an official letter addressing our concerns with the development and what we feel are more than reasonable compromises to some of the neighborhoods concern. But coming to see the actual property I. feel would be very helpful in your decision. Please feel free to bring another member of Council, if possible. Tom, when we moved to Minnesota more than four years ago from the. Milwaukee area we could have relocated anywhere in the Twin Cities, but we picked Chanhassen. We selected our 'new hometown• on the basis of the quality of life, schools and because everyone spoke highly of the great mix of town and country that made it a unique place. However, I fear that the changes now being proposed for our section. of the community could damage that image of Chanhassen. The once unique lifestyle that makes Chanhassen special is being sacrificed out of greed, not need. E Please call and let, me know when you can drop by to see the issue from our point of View ... our backyards. Thanks for listening. Steve Dale 2487 Bridle Creek Trail (952) 448-5574 (Home), (612) 303-0784 (Office) Electronic Privacy Notice. This e-mail, and any attachments, contains information that is, or may be, covered by electronic communications privacy laws, and is also confidential and. proprietary in nature. If you are not the intended recipient, please be advised that you are -legally prohibited from retaining, using, copying, distributing, or otherwise disclosing this information in any manner. instead, please reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error, and then immediately delete it. Thank .you in advance for your cooperation. 11 0 1�� 2292 Boulder Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 August 1, 2005 To City Council Members: My name is Sonya Benkstem. I live in the Stone Creek neighborhood and I have been a resident of that neighborhood and Chanhassen for 7 and 1/a years. I am writing this letter in regard to the proposed development on the corner of Galpin Boulevard and Lyman Boulevard. I want to make clear that I am not opposed to a development on this parcel, but I do have a concern on the impact it may have on the Stone Creek neighborhood. The concern I have relates to the positioning of the entrance of this new development. It is my understanding that City Staff is proposing that the entrance be directly across from the entrance to the Stone Creek neighborhood (on Stone Creek Drive). I am opposed to the location of this proposed entrance because it would pose a large safety risk to the children and families of my neighborhood and it would cause an influx of commercial traffic in an otherwise residential area. More Specifically, the things that concern me are as follows: I. Increase in commercial traffic in a residential area. As it stands today, we have little to no delivery/semi-truck traffic on Galpin Boulevard. Instead, this traffic occurs predominantly on Lyman Boulevard. It makes more sense to route commercial traffic to a more commercial area, i.e. the existing entrance to the development area off of Lyman. Location of the entrance off Lyman fits with the more commercial -type surrounding businesses on this road and the existing commercial deliveries (i.e. Holasek Nursery, small industrial facility to the west of the nursery, etc.). In contrast, routing the proposed new development's traffic off Galpin just doesn't fit. Galpin is a residential street and it makes little sense to route semi trucks and other delivery trucks onto our neighborhood streets. 2. Safety issues relating to our children. The increased commercial traffic on Galpin translates directly into safety issues for the children in the Stone Creek neighborhood as well as other surrounding neighborhoods. School busses travel up and down Galpin with great frequency as a result of Bluff Creek Elementary. School busses stop regularly, and increase semi and delivery traffic creates the risk for more accidents and injuries. Route the traffic, via an entrance to this development onto Lyman, where 1 know of no school bus stops. 3. Potential for a 4 way stop or traffic light intersection. The increased traffic as a result of this development would most likely result in some form of controlled intersection. This would introduce the potential for traffic to back up on Stone 0 0 Creek Drive into our neighborhood (most. frequently during rush hour times). This concerns me as there are bus stops along that stretch of road and Stone Creek Drive is the road that we (along with other neighbors) have to cross to get to the Stone Creek City Park. 4. Risk of injury to foot and bike traffic on Galpin. While we are fortunate to have a nice bike path which runs along Galpin, it is not always used (i.e. by kids who ride their bikes directly on Galpin). Routing semi and other commercial traffic, which will be traveling at speeds up to 50 mph or more (speed limit is 45 mph — but most traffic exceeds this limit), poses a safety risk to our kids. 5. Distance requirement issue. We have been told that Galpin is being.proposed as the entrance because of City and/or County "distance requirements." Even if this is the case, I have to believe that these can be modified in the interest of traffic and pedestrian safety. Further, for the reasons'above, the most logical location for an entrance is off of Lyman, not Galpin. It seems to me that if you are forced to "pick" which road will serve as the entrance to this development, choosing an entrance off of a more commercial road (i.e. Lyman) as opposed to a residential road (i.e. Galpin), is the right choice. In the process, the City will reduce noise levels on Galpin (and in our surrounding neighborhoods), preserve the residential - type setting which presently exists on Galpin, and reduce the risk of injury to kids, other traffic, and pedestrians. To conclude, I read a couple of weeks ago that Chanhassen was ranked very high on the list of best places to live in the country. My family and I have been very happy in this community and I know that this is owed. to the good decisions you have made on our behalf. I am asking you to please consider this development and the proposed entrance carefully — and do the right thing. I know that good businesses play a critical role in the community, but so do the families that live in your neighborhoods. Please keep us in mind during your decision making process. Sincerely Sonya A. Benkstein Message Page i of 2 Generous, Bob From: Gerhardt, Todd Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 8*41 AM To: Aanenson, Kate; Generous, Bob Subject: FW: Planned Development off of Lyman & Galpin Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged -----Original Message ----- From: Tom Furlong (mailto:tfuriong@ape)cfsi.comj Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 8:51 AM To: Gerhardt, Todd Subject: FW: Planned Development off of Lyman & Galpin -----Original Message ----- From: Peggy Emerson (mailto:peggy@mchsi.com) Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 8:59 PM To: council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Subject: Planned Development off of Lyman & Galpin Coucil Members, I live in Stone Creek (8409 Stone Creek Court),I attended the recent planningmeeting regarding the development across the street from our neighborhood. I was quite surprised that Chanhassen was considering a plan that is so inconsistent: with what surrounds the Property. I was amazed at how inconsistent the plan is with other development priorities in Chanhassen. I sat through several other items on the agenda in which beautifully .landscaped buildings were being criticized for lack of curb appeal etc. At least those plans were consistent with the properties surrounding them and that care was taken to ensure that surrounding properties would find the new development appealing to look at. In contrast, what we are talking about on Galpin/Lyman is an industrial development with capacity for many semi truck deliveries a day and very large unsightly buildings next two rather upscale neighborhoods. I believe you are setting a bad precedent as well -- why would someone want to build/live in Chanhassen if upscale neighborhoods can be allowed to be next to a large industrial development? I find this historically quite inconsistent with all the strict requirements the city has stuck to in the past. Someone on the planning commission stated that what will be developed is an improvement to what is there today. I find this rationale hard to understand. Sure after you drive up the residential driveway, past the tree, wind down a ravine, there is some junk about... but none of us can see any of that from where we live or even from the road. It sounds like the developer plans to fill in the level, especially on the North and Fast sides, which would automatically make all visible to our neighborhoods. This obviously concerns us. 0 8/2/2005 Message 0 0 Page 2 of 2 If this plan wasn't already unbelievable in it's inconsistency with its environment, I was almost laughing when they said the one and only entrance would be an intersection with the entrance to our neighborhood. All the commissioners seemed to just throw up their hands and say they could do nothing about an entrance off of Lyman, as the road is a Carver County road. The entrance off of Galpin was referred to as "already being a street intersection". Could you please drive down Galpin and see for yourself how silly that statement.is? It's basically a driveway to a house that happens to be across the street from the entrance to our neighborhood. Although, I see that recently someone quick threw up a stop sign on the "driveway" side, no doubt to reinforce the idea that it already was an intersection of streets. Further, why does it make sense to have all the traffic routed down Galpin (especially keeping in mind the fact that a school will be build right around the corner off Lyman)? You are just asking for fatalities of children due to large trucks delivering to the planned development. I can imagine the pedestrian traffic flow of Galpin changing quite a bit. when the school is complete. Perhaps kids will be walking and riding their bikes to Lifetime (having to cross Galpin). i. did not like the tone of the meeting. All the neighbors seemed to be conceding the fact that the multi -building manufacturing development was going forward. I would like to go a step further and ask you to reconsider the development in general. Just: as you were patient (and probably took some heat) for turning away other fitness clubs off of 41 and Hwy 5... it all paid off with something way better than anyone could even have imagined. Why don't we hold off on this development too? Something.much better and more appropriate could be done with that land! We can imagine that the city is quite over budget on residential developments (especially after hearing about all of them at the planning meeting), but it would not be best for Chanhassen to gain some quick industrial tax base while jeopardizing the consistency of our city plan. Thanks for your consideration, Peggy Emerson s/2r2oa5 Message J Page 'l. of 2 Generous, Bob444e� 6r,'14 Cfze�L From: Gerhardt, Todd Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 8:42 AM To: Aanenson, Kate; Generous, Bob Subject: FW: Proposed Business Development @ Galpin and Lyman Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged -----Original Message- --- From: Tom Furlong [mailto:tfuriong@apexfsi.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 8:50 AM To: Gerhardt, Todd Subject: FW: Proposed Business Development @ Galpin and Lyman -----Original Message ----- From: Curtis Zoerhof [mailto:zoerhofs@msn.com] Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 7:36 PM To: council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us ill ��-�r Cc: Mary&Bary-LaBounty IZ41LI Subject: Proposed Business Development @ Galpin and Lyman Dear Counsel Representatives, As members of the Trotter's Ridge neighborhood, we request your careful consideration of the negative impact such a development will have on our neighborhood. • Decreased property values for those homeowners on the South side of the neighborhood. • Unsightly views of dumpsters and parking lots. • Increased traffic on an already busy Galpin Blvd. Members of our neighborhood refer to Galpin as "Interstate Galpin" due to the level and -speed of the current traffic. We understand that your decisions must be made to represent the interests of the entire community and that the counsel has made it a priority to increase the number of businesses in Chanhassen, relative to residences. With the: right planning, the business development could be completed with minimal impact on the neighborhoods. Therefore, before making your final vote, please: • Request and review a current, site specific traffic study. • Request that County engineers review moving the proposed entrance from Galpin Blvd. to Lyman. The traffic issue is a serious safety concern. Not just -for drivers entering and exiting our neighborhood but more importantly for the school buses and elementary school children that use Galpin on a daily basis. Peggie personally witnessed more than one "near miss" of a school bus and motorist on Galpin. Please also consider that Bluff Creek Elementary School is only at the other end of the block and the volume of school buses, parents taking children to and from school, and children walking or on bikes is tremendous. We do not need more cars on Galpin. 8/212005 Message ' Page 2 of 2 We could be more comfortable with the proposed business development if the entrance were relocated to Lyman and the buffer zone between Trotter's Ridge were increased. We recently read that a major, national publication ranked Chanhassen as the 16th best place to live in the United States. Please give this and our requests your most careful, heartfelt consideration before voting on August 8. Careful planning that reflects the concerns of the residents most directly impacted by the project will allow Chanhassen to remain one of the best places to live. Peggie and Curt Zoerhof 952-937-5801 8/2/2005 Message` 1-1 Pagel of 1 Generous, Bob From: Tom Furlong [tfurlong@apexfsi.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 8:49 AM To: Gerhardt, Todd Subject: FW: Proposed Development on Galpin Blvd. Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged FYI -----Original Message----- . From: Helen Hollands (mailto:heien@xsrus.com] Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 10:36 AM To: council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Subject: Proposed Development on Galpin Blvd. Dear Council Members, live in the Stone Creek Neighbourhood so am interested in the proposed development on Galpin Blvd, just opposite Stone Creek Drive. I understand that there are a number of options under consideration for the development, some of which may increase significantly the traffic along Galpin Blvd (especially heavy freight vehicles). In order to properly evaluate the impact of this development on traffic and determine how best to handle it I request that a site specific traffic study be carried out for the roads that it will affect so that decisions can be taken based on current (i.e. 2005) data. Yours faithfully, Helen Hollands 2051 Boulder Road. s/2r200s FW: Quick comment about pi; PUD at Galpin &Lyman 1-1 Page 1 of 2 Generous, Bob a 35-7 ` �''� � L W From: Tom Furlong (tfurlong@apexfsi.com) Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 8:52 AM To: Gerhardt, Todd Subject: FW: Quick comment about proposed PUD at Galpin & Lyman ----Original Message ----- From: Tom Furlong Sent: Monday, August Of, 2oo5 8:11 AM To: 'Bill Rodriquez' Subject: RE: Quick comment about proposed PUD at GaW & Lyman Thank you for your email. While I can't respond to all of your concerns right now, please know that. I will provide an opportunity for public comment during the meeting on this development. I will try to call you to discuss the other items in your email. Thanks again for your thoughts. Tom Furlong, Mayor City of Chanhassen (952) 474-8891 home (612) 209-1152 cell tfurlong@ci.chanhassen.mn.us This e-mail message and all attachments are intended for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is confidential, privileged information or attorney work product. Any review or distribution by any other person is prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient, please immediately contact the sender and delete all copies. --original Message— From: Bill Rodriquez fmaifto:bitl.rMd guezCmd>si.com1 Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2005 9:36 PM To: tfurlong@d.chanhassen.mn.us; blundquist@d.chanhassen.mmus; cpeterson@d.thanhassen.mn.us Cc: rgustafson@co.carver mn.us; bwedrnan@eo.carver.mn.us Subject: Quick comment about proposed PUD at Galpin & Lyman Hello, all: I just wanted to drop a few words of concern about the warehouse -style PUD that is proposed for the corner of Lyman & Galpin Blvds. I live in the community across the street, Stone Creek. This PUD is up for a vote at your Aug. 8 City Council meeting. 8/2/2005 FW: Quick comment about proposed PUD at Galpin & Lyman Page 2 of 2 Here are my four concerns: • . I understand there's a chance the hearing may NOT be open to public comment. I hope that you will listen to what nearby residents have to say. Only then should you determine whether to approve the proposal as is or ask for modifications. • The proposed exit/entry into the PUD is on Galpin, directly across from the Stone Creek access onto Galphin. This is going to cause quite a 4-way traffic back-up during busy hours. The preference within our neighborhood is for the PUD's exit/entry to be on Lyman. I realize there might be some county regulations that may restrict this, but my understanding is that this has not been fully explored. (Messers Gustafson and Weckman, I believe a couple residents are in the process of contacting to you for clarification on this issue.) You may want to stop by sometime this week during the commuter rush hour to observe firsthand the traffic up and down Galpin. It can get hectic, especially at the Stone Creek/Galpin intersection. Putting yet another artery there is going to make things a lot worse. In addition, there's a lot of school traffic along this road during Sept -June. • No one wants to spend good money on a home, only to have a warehouse go up across the street. Can we at. least get the developer to build office -style townhomes along the Galpin corridor, somewhat similar to what's being built on Highway 5 near the Family of Christ Church? • Finally, residents would like to see a 150-foot setback from Galpin for the PUD to further buffer the noise and enhance the esthetics. I'm not against the development per se. But I'm hoping the developer (he sits on the Planning Commission, ironically!) will be more sensitive to the concerns of neighbors whose properties will be affected by his work. Thanks for listening. And don't hesitate to contact me if you'd like to talk about this. My office number is 952-883-5274, home is 401-0546. Thanks again. Bill.Rodriguez@mchsi.com 8/2/2005 Message Page 1 of 2 Generous, Bob From: Tom Furlong [tiurlong@apexfsi.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 8:51 AM To: Gerhardt, Todd Subject: FW: Concerned Citizens -- Lyman/Galpin Proposed Rezoning and Development -- August 8th City Council Meeting Vote Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged -----Original Message ----- From: Chrysauna Buan (mailto:cbuan@mchsi.com] Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2005 6:57 PM To: tfurlong@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Subject: Concerned Citizens -- Lyman/Galpin Proposed Rezoning and Development -- August 8th City Council Meeting Vote Tom, We are writing to share our concern over the proposed rezoning of the land on the corner of Lyman Boulevard and Galpin Boulevard from agricultural to industrial. We became very concerned when the Planning Commission approved this proposal with a 3-2 vote on July 19th. Of the five commissioners who voted, • Two were strongly opposed due to the increased traffic it would create on Galpin Boulevard, a street lined with residential neighborhoods. Rightfully so, the estimated inereasein daily traffic in and out of this_yroposed develonment_is_2.600 vehicles,Bostly trucks. ■ Another commissioner had strong concerns about the traffic and the negative impact that the tall buildings would have on the Stone Creek development. The -proposed buildings are la e and would be verv_close to the Stone Creek develonment_with _few trees in- eta. it The remaining two commissions both stated that the proposed development did not blend well with the surrounding residential neighborhoods. One even compared the residential neighborhoods and the proposed development as two plates colliding together. Given all these concerns, why was this proposal approved? We ask that when you review this proposal on August 8th please consider the negative impact that this type of development would have on the surrounding residential communities. Given that the land is next to two beautiful neighborhoods and that Carver County is requesting the entrance/exit be placed on Galpin Boulevard we feel that a residential neighborhood would be a more appropriate use of this land. Please vote Dq_tg t e e onin roposal and recommend that the land he Epzpned from a ricultural to residential instead. After you read this email we invite you to drive down Galpin Boulevard beginning at Hwy 5 and Bluff Creek Elementary School. You will travel down a turning road lined with mature trees. On both sides you will see homes that people have made their own with personal touches such as perennial gardens, children's play sets, basketball hoops, putting greens and swimming pools. On the sidewalks on each side, you will encounter people walking their dogs and children on their bikes. As you reach the end of Galpin Boulevard, you will see the Stone Creek development on your left side. According to local 8/2/2005 Message Page 2 of 2 realtors, this neighborhood is a very popular, high demand development for people who would like to make Chanhassen their home. Directly across from Stone Creek you will see the proposed development. site. Future home to concrete buildings, the minimum number of trees required along Galpin Boulevard, and an estimated 2,600 cars and trucks entering and exiting. Is this really what the city of Chanhassen would like? The city that was just rated 16rh in the nation for quality of life. I know it is not what the residents along Galpin Boulevard would like. Sincerely, Rick & Chrysauna Buan 2369 Stone Creek LN W Chanhassen MN 55317 PH: 952.474.6427 81212005 Page 1 of 2 Generous, Bob From: Kelly & Sara Morlock [ksm 143@msn.comj Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 200512:12 PM To: City Council Cc: Generous, Bob Subject: GalpinfLyman Proposed Development Dear City Council Members: My name is Sara Moriock. My husband, Kelly and our two children, live at 2325 Boulder Road, Chanhassen. The back of our property faces Galpin and is directly impacted by the proposed development on the property at Galpin and Lyman Blvds. I am writing to you to get on record with some thoughts and considerations for you prior to the August 8th City Council meeting. First, the traffic study being used by the County is based on data from 1996 and are general traffic studies, not site specific. We would like to see a current, site specific traffic study to determine realistic traffic impacts to our neighborhoods and Galpin Boulevard. Without current information, we do not see how you can make an informed decision regarding this proposed development! Secondly, as you may be aware, the County "prefers" the development to have one access road directly across the street from the main entrance to our neighborhood. The County states that an entrance off Lyman would be out of County Code due to the fact that Norex Drive (the entrance road to the Chaska Industrial park) would be within 1,000 - 1,300 feet of the proposed development entrance. The fact of the matter is the existing proposed entrance off Galpin is not within County Code. Not to mention: the obvious concerns we have with safety for our children and the significant increase in traffic in and out of the proposed development, on Galpin and in our neighborhood. As the proposed entrance (across from the Stone Creek entrance) does not meet County code, we would like to see the entrance to this development off Lyman or perhaps through the adjacent Chaska Industrial Park. Thirdly, as you review the plans, you will see that the majority of mature trees along Galpin Blvd will be destroyed in the process of this proposed development. This leaves the residents along Boulder Road with an unsightly view of two to three story office/light industrial buildings. While we realize they will replace trees and provide landscaping, we would like to see more mature trees preserved along Galpin to provide our neighborhood with a reasonable buffer against the proposed development. Finally, we would like to see the buildings no taller than one story. This will help to buffer our neighborhood and will limit the types of industry that can go into these buildings. In speaking with our neighbors, we are realistic to understand that at some point this property will be developed. Our goal is to work with the developer to make this office park as minimally invasive to our lives/property as possible. I urge to to drive out to see the site. The property has many, many mature oaks and other trees that will be destroyed should this development be approved. Stand on Galpin and imagine this property is YOUR backyard! What would be acceptable to you as a property owner?! I thank you for your time in reading this and am hopeful you will take into consideration the concerns and requests we liave made. 7/26/2005 40 Page 2 of 2 Regards, Sara & Kelly Morlock 2325 Boulder Road 952/474-4572 Home 612/209-1691 Cell 7/26/2005 E Page 1 of 1 Generous, Bob From: Thor Smith (tsmith@thebpfg.com) Sent: Thursday, July 21, 20051:24 PM To: Generous, Bob Subject: Proposed Galpin Development Dear Mr. Generous, wanted give you a few quick comments about the proposed development along Galpin Blvd. I am supportive of the actual development itself (as long as they are willing to change the height of a building or two and preserve more trees than proposed.) However, I feel that the added amount of traffic not only along Galpin, but through the Stone Creek neighborhood poses a rather large safety issue for the multitudes of young children living in Stone Creek and Creekside neighborhoods. I would suggest that the city of Chanhassen propose to the city of Chaska that the developer be allowed to access his development via the Chaska business park. By doing this, it would alleviate both the request to put the access on Lyman (which simply isn't going to happen per Carver County) and gets rid of the need for an unsightly four way intersection attaching an industrial development with an upscale residential neighborhood. am fully aware of the potential logistical problems with this and I feel that by making efforts to keep the traffic levels on residential streets lower, we are helping to create a safer place for our kids. Unfortunately I was unable to attend the meeting this week so I wasn't able to bring this up. I did watch the majority of the meeting on tv. Thor E. Smith President BluePoint Financial Group, inc. 952-476-1084 ph. 952-476-0855 fax tsmith@theb f .com P.s. I need your help spreading the word about my business. If anyone you know is going to buy or refinance their home, please let us know. Anyone you refer to us will always recieve the highest level professional service. Thank you. Visit us o the web at: www.blueDointfinancialgroup.com 7/21/2005 LI E July .19, 2005 City of Chanhassen Planning Commission Chanhassen MN Dear Commissioners, My name is Joel Lehrke and I reside at 2329 Boulder Road. I wish to bring to your attention some concerns I have in regards to the Chanhassen West Business Park. I am located on the east side of the PUD and my back yard would face it. I. apologize for not being at the meeting in person, but I am away on a business trip. First, I do not believe the PUD, as is proposed, fits a proper transition from single family residential to industrial. The buildings that are proposed for this site are very massive. From the pictures I have seen, these buildings would have a very dominant look to them and would clash with the appearance of the residential homes in the area. Further I do not have a good feeling as to how high these buildings could be. I have heard remarks from Eden Trace at the open house of up to 40 feet. Also, the number of buildings that would be located at this site is quite large. I feel the density is too great. Second, I am worried about the changes to topography. The wetland located in the NE comer of this lot, would be filled and an elevation change of about nine feet would occur. While I have been told this wet land is of low quality and the replacement would be better, I must say that this would be a very massive change to the look of the area. Moreover, I am concerned about the flow of water in this area. While I have been informed by staff that there is a southern flow of water in the NE corner, I have heard comments from Trotters Ridge residents of a northern flow. The residents have commented about water problems and Eden Trace made a comment at the open house that they were also aware of this northern water flow. _ Third, I am concern about the large mature trees that will be destroyed or damaged in this PUD. While there is a great effort to save a number of trees, the actual benefit to the surrounding residents would be low. By this I mean the area saved would be an isolated island and many of the surrounding residents would not enjoy the views or pleasure of these trees as they do now. I personally am concerned with the grove of mature trees located in the SE corner near the home. While it is true that these trees will be replaced, they will be replaced with much smaller trees. These large trees have provided a natural site block and would change the view drastically for myself and fellow neighbors. These trees are marked for removal when building site 1 is built. ® 0 I will state that I have no time for residents that do not do their research before they move into an area. I wish to explain to you how I did do my research. I talked with city planners before I moved into the area as to the plans. At that time the area was agricultural and much of the area was going residential and that they had many builders looking at the area. Zoning was being change to reflect this. A potential for a large industrial park was not mentioned by city planners. Builders were looking at that site and doing research as to its development. As a matter of fact I was informed at the time of my build by the Hans Hagen salesmen and site supervisor that they were looking at developing the area. I also spoke with individuals involved with grading of Trotters Ridge and they had heard that they were looking at putting the roads into the area. From this I could only come to a conclusion that the area would eventually be residential and not agricultural or industrial. I do have a proposal for the site. I see town home type office buildings being built on the north and east portion of this lot. They would be similar in style to the ones being built along Hwy 5 next to Family of Christ Church. I would move back or eliminate building 1 to protect the mature trees in the SE corner. Even more, with town home style office buildings, they could be placed in a way to save these trees and create an enjoyable office area. Larger warehouse type buildings would then be placed towards the W and SW portion of the lot, keeping these types of businesses away from the adjacent residential areas. The town home style would have to be high enough to block site lines of the warehouses. I further believe there should be restriction as to hours of use. That manufacturing that involves chemicals, smells, loud noises and heavy truck traffic, should be banned from this office park The main access for this industrial area should be from Lyman Boulevard. In closing, the most important thing I can emphasize is the PUD is too drastic of a transition in its present form. An example of a good transition is the industrial area in Eden Prairie, south of Anderson Lake Pkwy and west of hwy 212. this industrial park is surrounded by strip malls and apartment buildings on the north, small business buildings and town home style office buildings on the east side, a school on the south end, and high density town homes on the west. Also please preserve the appearance of the lot in regards to mature trees and topography, especially in the SE corner I ask you NOT to approve the PUD in its present form. Sincerely, Joel Lehrke 2329 Boulder Road Chanhassen MN 55317 Home 952 470 5953 Cell 612 386 7184 Email Joel@Lehrke.name u July 15, 2005 Dear Planning Commissioner Sacchet : Last Thursday evening, the neighbors of Trotters Ridge and surrounding area met to discuss our concerns and requests to be brought before the Planning Commission about the proposed Chanhassen West Business Park. We reviewed the Staff Report and discussed each of the Conditions of Approval at length. As a result, we have a number of revised and new conditions we ask you to seriously consider including in your recommendations about this proposed development on July 19. These suggestions are attached in condition format which we hope you will find helpful. We also had several questions for Staff about the conditions. Because of the unique location of Trotters Ridge within a large expanse of industrial development, we are seeking increased buffering and restrictions to maintain the quality of life in our neighborhood. We look forward to the upcoming Planning Commission meeting. I will be speaking on behalf of the neighbors who met on Thursday. If you have any questions or suggestions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Respectfully submitted, Lu Ann Sidney 2431 Bridle Creek Trail Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 474-3835 LASidney@msn.com Revised July 19, 2005 Chanhassen West Business Park Trotters Ridge suggested revised and new conditions to Staff Report (Planning Case 05-23) Under Recommendations, pg. 19, revise the conditions listed in B to include: Condition # 1. Increase Blue Spruce, Ash, Maples, and Lindens on east and north side (including Outlot B) of the development to exceed buffer yard requirements by 100%.:Plantings along Outlot B to be outside the wetland buffer zone. 3. Increase buffer zone around trees where tree protection fencing will he placed to a minimum of IO feet beyond the drip line. 5. Trees should be planted beyond the wetland buffer zones of 16.5 to 20 feet. 23. Retaining wall must be moved outside the 100 foot buffer zone on the Northeast side of Building 6. 26. A secondary safety access road must be provided. Safety access seems insufficient. 35.d Move the primary access to Lyman Blvd. (The neighborhood is concerned that the increased traffic flow on Galpin Blvd will endanger children.) 36.h Construction rock entrance must be off Lyman Blvd. All construction traffic shall stay off of Galpin Blvd. 51. See 35A issues. The following were questions we had during the meeting: 24. What does "Provide a water service for Lot 6" mean? 35.h Why realign lot 5 access perpendicular to the shared driveway? What is the impact on trees? 43. What does "any offshe grading" mean and who would this impact? Per Staff, the Report was revised 7/14/05 to include Condition 53: 53. The developer shall either dedicate Outlot C. to the City for open space purposes or dedicate a conservation easement over Outlot C. ® 0 Other Conditions for the PlanninLy Commission to recommend: 54. Provide 100% screening from North boundary properties. The buffer zone shall be increased to at least 200 feet. 55. The applicant shall reduce the square footage of Building 6 to a maximum of 50,000 sq. ft. and provide appropriate articulation, especially on the North property boundary. The heights of Buildings 5 and 6 will not exceed 1 story plus parapet for screening of rooftop equipment. 56. The applicant shall add a minimum 15 foot berm with landscaping to provide 100% screening along Outlot B and lots 14 Trotters Ridge residences. Landscaping shall include a mixture of deciduous and coniferous trees. The berm along lots 1-4 will have grass and be mowed and maintained. 57. The silt fence on the north boundary will be located a minimum of 10 feet beyond the drip line of the large oak on Trotters Ridge lot 5. Tree protection fencing will also be added. End berm at lot 4. 58. Outlot C must be designated as a Permanent Conservation Easement. (Substitute for Condition 53) 59. Keep retaining walls 10 feet outside the drip line of existing trees in the Northeast Corner. 60. In order to save mature trees continue 100 foot buffer on the east side along Galpin Blvd. Please consider amending the Development Desijzn Standards on piz. 4 in the Sta Re ort as ollows: Applicant shall limit the Hours of Operation for any business to 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM. (b. Permitted Uses) . Business types shall not include conference/convention centers or hotels/motels or research labs. (b. Permitted Uses) The applicant shall not permit outdoor storage of any kind. (b. Prohibited Ancillary Uses) .Businesses shall not have outdoor paging systems. (b. Prohibited Ancillary Uses) The applicant shall provide for additional soundproofing materials in Buildings 5 and 6. (e. Building Materials and Design) The light level for site lighting shall be zero foot-candles at the North property line. (h.4. Lighting) No lighted signs, either externally or internally lighted, will be permitted. (g. Signage) At the conclusion of our meeting, we summarized the neighbors' feelings about the proposed developient and respectfully make the following request of Planning Commission and ultimately, City Council: The Trotters Ridge Development requests special consideration and a reasonable transition between the residential and industrial areas due to the fact that we are being made an "island of residential" within a "sea of industrial development." Residents chose to live in this area for the natural beauty in the area provided by the mature growth of trees and safety of the area far our children. Represented by this document: Chuck and Barb Nickolay Steve & Sarah Dale Tom and Jo Ellen Rademacher Dan & Shelley Luna Gay Schmidt Peter & LuAnn Sidney Drew & Stephanie: Dingman Chris & Mark Fischer Rodney & Janice Melton Alex & Eleta Donaldson July 15, 2005 Dear City of Chanhassen Planning Commissioner: You've been invited by our neighbors, Barry LaBounty and,LuAnn Sidney, to visit properties on Bridle Creek Trail that abut the proposed Chanhassen West Business Park. This item is scheduled to be before the Planning Commission on July 19, 2005. While we do not oppose the development of the land behind our homes, my husband and I have some specific concerns about the plans that we would like to put before the commission for your consideration. As you make your recommendations on this proposed development, we ask that you support our request for the following to ensure that the transition from commercial to residential be managed in such a manner that our neighborhood is not adversely impacted. The stretch of road between Hwy 5 and Lyman Blvd. is primarily residential. In developing the property on the corner of Galpin and Lyman, we would like to see maximum effort made to ensure that the character of this area remains residential and family oriented in nature. The types of businesses and the hours that will be allowed to operate will definitely impact this, as will the over all "look" of the business park (building designs). Businesses should not be allowed to operate on a 24 hour basis, outside security lights should not be allowed on the north side along the residential property line and all fans,.AC units or other mechanical units must be screened and soundproofed to ensure zero impact on us and our neighbors. Our home will directly abut the property line of the largest lot on the proposed development; potentially allowing the largest building of this development to be built in our backyard. We foresee that this may very likely have a negative impact our property value. To minimize this impact, the height of the buildings that directly abut the residential property lines must not exceed 1 story (18-20 feet), a berm of 15 20 feet high should be created and planted with dense coniferous and deciduous forestry that provides a year-round barrier, and the set -back be increased to 200 feet. • Current plans show access to the development coming from Cty Rd. 19 (Galpin Blvd). The certain increase in traffic on Galpin is a concern for two reasons: 1. the increased noise level and 2. if school district budget cuts ever require the elementary aged children in our neighborhood (and there are many!) to walk to school, the increased car and delivery truck traffic would pose a threat to their safety as they crossed Galpin to get to Bluff Creek Elementary. It is imperative that the access to this business park be from Lyman Blvd. vs. Galpin. Upon inspection, I believe you would agree that this would also seem a logical condition as well. Appropriate drainage of water from the wetland area located directly behind our home will also be critical. Steps must be taken to ensure that runoff from the proposed berm not pool in our backyard. We look forward to your support in protecting our residential property values and livability through a welt -balanced, yet considerate, relationship of land use, roadways and natural features as plans for this proposed development are considered. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Respectfully, Christine and Mark Fischer 2407 Bridle Creek Trail Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 470-0838 cmmaf: scher @juno.com City of Chanhassen Planning Case 05-23 f� Page 1 of 2 Generous, Bob From: Morris, Alyson Sent: Frlday, July 15, 2005 8:14 AM To: Generous, Bob Subject: FW: City of Chanhassen Planning Case 05-23 FAY -----Original Message ----- From: Bill Weckman[mailto:bweckman@co.carver.mn.us] Sent: Thursday, 30y 14, 2005 4:24 PM To: Morris, Alyson Subject: RE: City of Chanhassen Planning Case 05-23 Alyson, CSAH 19 (Galpin Blvd) was reconstructed in 1996 as a 52 foot face to face curb and gutter urban section. That particular section was chosen because it could immediately accommodate a two-lane roadway with 12 foot right turn lanes or by-pass lanes at the intersections and could be re -striped in the future as a four lane roadway or a "super three" lane roadway with a dedicated left turn lane and thru-rights on each side. At that time traffic studies indicated that future traffic on Galpin Blvd was very dependent on if new TH 212 were built or not built. If monitoring of the traffic indicates the present two-lane facility is `breaking down" due to increased traffic, consideration will be given to moving forward to one of the two alternative lane configuration alignments. It would be the County's preference to have a consistent striping "theme" through the entire corridor, not a mixture of striping configurations at various intersections. As some additional information: The 1996 ADT on CSAH 19 was 3250 vpd on the north end. The 2003 ADT was 4,450 on the north end and 3,100 on the south end of CSAH 19. The 1996 ADT on CSAH 18 was 7,800 vpd in the Galpin Blvd area of CSAH 18. The 2003 ADT was 8,300 vpd. The transportation plan incorporated into the current County comprehensive plan includes the following traffic projections: 2010 — Galpin 5,500 with new TH 212 in place by 2010. 2010 — Galpin 9,200 with new TH 212 in place after 2010. 2010 — Lyman (CSAH 18) 10,500 with new TH 212 in place by 2010. 2010 —Lyman (CSAH 18) 9,000 with new TH 212 in place after 2010. 2020 — Galpin 6,000 with new TH 212 in place by 2010. 2020 — Galpin 10,000 with new TH 212 in place after 2010. 2020 — Lyman (CSAH 18) 11,500 with new TH 212 in place by 2010. 2020 — Lyman (CSAH 18) 14,000 with new TH 212 in place after 2010. know it will not be much consolation to the people along Galpin, but this study indicates that as a result of new TH 212 being constructed now and completed by 2010 (project should be totally finished by the end of 2008) traffic on Galpin will not increase as fast or as much as it would have if TH 212 was not being built. This information also gives you a better understanding on why access onto Lyman (CSAH 18) for this development is not preferred by the County. Please be aware that these traffic numbers are from an overall area traffic study and are not site specific. Hope this information will help you. Bill Weckman, P.E. Carver County Public Works 952.466.5207 7/15/2005 City of Chanhassen Planning Case 05-23 6 0 Page 2 of 2 952-466.522-3 (fax) Email - bweckman@co.carver.mn.us `The unauthorized disclosure or interception of e-mail is a federal crime. See 18 U.S.C. SEC. 2517(4). This e-mail is intended only for the use of those whom it is addressed and may contain information which is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under the law. If you have received this e-mail in error, do not distnWe or copy it. Return it irnmediately to the sender with attachments, if any, and notify the sender by telephone' ---..Original Message ----- From: Morris, Alyson[mailto:amorris@ci.chanhassen.mn.us] Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 3:04 PM To: Bill Weckman Subject: RE: City of Chanhassen Planning Case 05-23 We anticipate that some residents will show up for the public hearing with questions, regarding the traffic that will be generated from this project. Using the ITE 1997 manual, Bob figures that the site will result in the following traffic: Average weekday 2,436 trip ends AM peak 311 trip ends PM peak 322 trip ends Ave. Saturday 872 trip ends Ave. Sunday 256 trip ends Based on these numbers, would the County require a left turn lane into the site from northbound Galpin? Looking at the striping plan for SAP 10-619-04, would it be possible to restdpe northbound Galpin to accommodate an exclusive left turn lane and a through -right turn lane? Thanks for your help, Alyson 7/15/2005 Page 1 of 1 CJ Generous, Bob From: Kelly & Sara Morlock [ksrr 143@msn.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 2:45 PM To: mundestad@centercompanies.com; bmerriman@centercompanies.com; Generous, Bob Subject: Galpin/Lyman Proposed Development Gentlemen: I am writing on behalf of concerned neighbors in the Stone Creek neighborhood. Attached you will find a document outlining concerns and expectations regarding your proposed development. While we would prefer the land to remain as it, we are also realistic that eventually something will be developed on this property. If you are able to address these concerns and meet the outlined expectations, it is our belief that we can come to mutual agreement on moving forward with the proposal. My reason for providing this information to you prior to the meeting this afternoon is to make you aware of the issues that will be raised and provide you some time to be prepared to address them. It is very important to our neighborhoods off Galpin Boulevard that we maintain and reflect the peaceful nature of our residential community. For these reasons, it is imperative that any development on this property is reflective of our current neighborhoods. Sara Morlock and Stone Creek neighbors 7/14/2005 Issues regarding Proposed Development: Must promote Good Design (Good Design will provide quality solutions for issues of Land Use, Aesthetics, Safety and Function that will benefit both the affected neighborhoods and the new development). Land Use —Preservation of Existing Amenities (Mature Trees, Woodlands, Wetlands, existing terrain and open space) • Revisit location of drives, buildings, parking areas and service to Preserve wooded areas, and mature trees — most importantly along entire Eastern edge and Northern edges to provide and maintain existing buffer (both visually and physically) to the residential neighborhoods that will face it. This will in turn create a greater amenity for the new development. • Minimize service zones, drive lanes, parking and other paved areas to maximize open space, and preserve tree and wetland areas. • Keep buildings and paved areas out and away from wetland setback areas, for preservation of these amenities (specifically Buildings 4 and 5). • Reduce the number of proposed buildings. • Eliminate light industrial usage. Aesthetics - • Quality Materials .. such as brick, stucco, architectural precast, and metal. (Lesser materials such as rockface block, painted concrete block, low-grade siding is inadequate and inappropriate where visible to patrons and general public). • Quality Landscaping —above minimum requirements to create acceptable buffer zones and enhance existing landscaping/terrain, through use of vegetation, plantings, berms, rock features and natural looking retaining walls.) • Quality Signage • Parking— break up with landscaped areas to avoid "sea of parking." • Environmental concerns of light industrial businesses. Safety — • Concern over location and number of drives into development site, depending on specific type of use. Currently only one ingress/egress from site. Service vehicles entering to and from Galpin pose greater safety concerns for children's safety along Galpin (especially if light industrial/warehouse use. Relocate by placing the entrancelexit off Lyman to minimize impact. • Similar concern over noise of service vehicles with the single entrance point. • Traffic Study Analysis — to see what the impact might be for Galpin, this proposed intersection and access to main entrance of Stone Creek neighborhood. Function -- • Concealing of Service areas from public view • Efficient use and layout of land to minimize impact on existing features and minimize grading requirements. Issues regarding City Planning and zoning: Lack of connectivity between neighborhoods through hodge-podge development. Review planning and zoning foresight of community with actual built environment to justify appropriate type of development. Determine if Galpin is designed for impact of proposed road use. City of Chanhassen Planning Case 05-23 0 I] Page 1 of 2 Generous, Bob From: Morris, Alyson Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 200510:23 AM To: 'Bill Weckman' Cc: Oehme, Paul; Generous, Bob; Sweldan, Mahmoud; Aanenson, Kate Subject: RE: City of Chanhassen Planning Case 05-23 Your quick response is greatly appreciated. Thanks, Alyson -----Original Message ----- From: Bill Weckman[mailto:bweckman@co.carver.mn.us] Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 10:23 AM To: Morris, Alyson Cc: Roger Gustafson Subject: City of Chanhassen Planning Case 05-23 Allison - This email is a follow-up to my June 28, 2005 memo to Robert Generous and in response to our July 12, 2005 telephone conversation regarding the request for rezoning for the Chanhassen West Business Park located in the northwest quadrant of the CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd) and CSAH 19 (Galpin Blvd) intersection. The plan received indicated access for this development was to be onto Galpin Blvd across from the Stone Creek Drive access onto Galpin Blvd creating a cross intersection. This would be the County's preference for access to this parcel CSAH 18 and CSAH 19 are both minor arterial roadways on the Carver County roadway system. CSAH 18 has the larger projected traffic of the two roadways because it is an east -west arterial corridor that stretches from CSAH 11 (Victoria Drive) in Victoria to the west to TH 101 in Chanhassen in the east. The portion of CSAH 18 from CSAH 13 (Bavaria Road) in Victoria to west of TH 41 is presently 82"d Street. and will be reconstructed as part of a future roadway project when development creates the need for the improvement of that corridor. Carver County's objectives include limiting the number of accesses to CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd.) and require that accesses that are permitted onto CSAH 18 be public street accesses in order to maintain traffic mobility on the corridor. Traffic projections for these corridors indicate that there may be an eventual need for the installation of a traffic signal at the CSAH 18/CSAH 19 intersection. That need will be evaluated as development and resulting traffic increases continue to occur in this area. For these reasons, Carver County would prefer that access from the Chanhassen West Park Business development to CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd.) would not be a consideration as part of this proposal. If you have questions regarding this response, feel free to give me a call. 7/15/2005 City of Chanhassen Planning Case 05-23 Aft E Page 2 of 2 Could you confirm receipt of this email? Thanks. Bill Weckman, P.E. Carver County Public Works 952.466.5207 952.466.5223 (fax) Email - bweckman@co.carver.mn.us 'The unauthorized disclosure or interception of e-mail is a federal crime. See 18 U.S.C. SEC. 2517(4). This e-mail is intended only for the use of those whom it is addressed and may contain information which is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under the law. If you have received this e-mail in error, do not distribute or copy it. Retum it immediately to the sender with attachments, if any, and notify the sender by telephone! 7/15/2005 Carver County Water Management— Department of Planning & Zoning Comm-etGfftw—Ad4 istra5m BUMM 600 East P Street Chaska, 55318 Phone: (952)361-1820 Fax: (952)361-1828 Lh .00.ca rnausJvvat Memo To: Robert Generous, City of Chanhassen From: Paul Moline, Carver County Water Management Date: 7/8/2005 Re: Chanhassen West Business park (County Water Project 20050038) CC. Lori Haak, City of Chanhassen Ben Merriman, Center Companies Aaron Mlynek, Carver SWCD Enclosures: none Carver County Water Management is offering comments on the Chanhassen West Business Park in the City of Chanhassen. The County is the Watershed authority for this portion of Chanhassen and will need to receive an application for Water Management Rule approval prior to eonstrwtion. These Rules cover stormwater and erosion & sediment control issues on the site. The County met with the City and the applicant on June 16. Issues: • Prior to approval, the County will need to receive an application, fee and submittal of the following information {detailed requirements can be found at www.co.carver.mn.us/Divisions/L dWaterSerAoes/PVApplications.htmq: o Site Plan o Water Features. o Erosion and Sediment Control Plan o Stormwater management plan including hydrologic calculations, existing and proposed drainage, off -site flows, and method for meeting the County's infiltration requirement. Major issues discussed the June 16 meeting were o Infiltration requirement —applicant discussed ways of incorporating the requirement into swales , parking medians, etc. These details do not show up on plans sent for comment by the City. o Off site flows -- ensuring that impact from offshe flows does not create nuisance downstream conditions, particularly to the south and east. Again, the County will need to receive this information and approve the stormwater and erosion & sediment control plans before development begins on the site. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Paul Moline 952.361.1825 pmolinefto.carver mn.us ® Planning Case No. 0r"=> oZ CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market, Boulevard - P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN • 55317 — (952) 227-:1100 ClTY OF CNANyASSeN RECEIVED DEVELOPMENT -REVIEW APPLICATION ' 'JUN' 17 2605 PLEASE PRINT--: Applicant Name andAddress: Contact: Phone: - 6(-* Fax: 361' 67z3 Email: d e cA,&, Comprehensive Plan Amendment Conditional Use Permit Interim Use Permit : Non -conforming Use Permit XPlanned Unit Development. a •; Rezoning r Sign Permits Sign Plan Review Site Plan Review* Subdivision` ! 6100 tSx� ions) 111ASSEN P! M14ING DEFT Ow4et Narrie and -Address: Contact:_ &:t -- , � Phone: ?S;k F��7s3 Fax:_- ?� - 5Yro-- s�9 Email: n:L. e r' Temporary Sales Permit Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements Variance Wetland Alteration Permit 2.7Jr- Zoning Appeal , Zoning Ordinance Amendment 1:75_ Notification Sign** - $75 + $100 Damage Deposit X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attdmey Cost*** CUP/SPRNACNARIWAP/Metes & Bounds 50 inor SUB TOTAL 1FEE $ ..Q An additional fee of $3.00 per address within the public hearing notification area will be invoiced to the applicant prior to the public hearing. * Twenty-six (26) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8W X I i' reduced copy for each plan sheet along with a di ital cop in TIFF =Group 4 (*.1J0 format. '* Applicant to obtain notification sign from City of Chanhassen Public Works at 1591 Park Road and install upon submittal of completed application. $100 damage deposit to be refunded to applicant when sign is returned following City Council approval. ` Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. NOTE: When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. $mum PROJECT NAME: _0s-e etig i n 2 3 S = LOCATION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: (� 56 1, o 5F 1 Q -T. i I6 r Z J ✓K ..wV+� .%�i TOTAL ACREAGE: WETLANDS PRESENT: YES NO PRESENT ZONING: REQUESTED ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: t REASON FOR REQUEST: This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. . e A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am_ responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this: request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any natter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. T I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and Information:[ have submitted are tnfe and correct to the best of my knowledge. t� 17 05 Signature of Applicant %Date 222,_,1 oP SCANHID Signature of Fee Owner Date 02WANanlfomWDevelopment Review Applicaion.DOC = Rev.4/05 m f- a N � a ¢p o N 1 z 1 1 t LU O w fi v l � � �NG�tipW-gLVD•.� �..ai.. --� �� . ..�11111i 111llllllllllllh i N F M � • _ 1 1 e� --i IL � © i 1 ry G7 ti f� ~ � J ao F (tJ k- 1 m n a N011O(3`d 081HI X8ed 6088V a Rd an 1r m .3tYS Y• Y Y Y $ q rill A •SS%Y SYYSY �:}y =� i • s = @ 1 K o Y jsfti �:�7 a v! � � ire � �s �� iIl ij • s 4 1 i �' •- sill $ �i: H1 Ll 11011 ell A Ott o uj .'.J ♦ (rl a "" � ••\, J � 11 IIf11 I111 w' Ilk;llllll /� ` f.\. �a � •, .,.. �. N01100V Od1N1 A8bd W88V �, '� g 00 4 R K' 1 LILIt` Will co A Y�a25iaL.t�sS•� j- •��-' � � �� drN tir � . �� ✓ � - X ;. � � � �� 1 La OD �wr. •��\ 1 ``� \ .J � �f r �. it � � � � �i3 4 i fill Cad MH1 AVd:�� O Q O O O O O V Q d O O Z LI � D 11i Lu 3TT n o o n dillwr a n � m w a o 0 0 0 0 gill y, m rs � •? o � � > g r� �� ,� �, 11:3! y•�1 rrt..�nloom ..tlp:� MIMIIIMIIIIIIIi H M111IlIMII; H1, CD At u�u � ram: �!) � s � . ►.,��% ��°�a . � �>�� W&U. {lIIIp��" a p s��111 Y 1 Caner county 18SS-200S June 28, 2005 CARVER COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS 11360 Highway 212 West AdmParks ion P.O. Box 300 Engineering Cologne, NW 55322-0300 Highway Maintenance Phone (952) 466-5200 Fax (952) 466-5223 Equipment Maintenance Surveying & Mapping RECEIVED JUL - 5. 2005 To: Robert Generous, Senior Planner, City of Chanhassen CROFC'KAWSSFN From: Bill Weckman, Assistant County Engineer Subject: Request for Rezoning Chanhassen West Business Park (05-23) We have reviewed the information regarding the Chanhassen West Business Park preliminary plat transmitted to Carver County by your memorandum dated June 20, 2005. These comments are based on that review. Further comments may be necessary as the plans progress. 1. Right-of-way widths listed in the Eastern Carver County Transportation Study for roadways functionally classified as "A" Minor Arterials: Urban Undivided Rural Undivided: _ 2-lane Roadway " - _ _ 2-lane Roadway Minimum Recommended - `a 'Minimum Recommended 100, 110, 120' 150, Urban Undivided" Rural Undivided " 4-lane Roadway 4-lane Roadway Minimum Recommended Minimum Recommended 100' 120' 140' 170' CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd.) and CSAH 19 (Gaipin Blvd.) are functionally classified as "A" Minor Arterial roadways in the Carver County Transportation Study. The preliminary plat needs to be reviewed to determine if the corridor shown on the plat will meet the needs for a future urban roadway. Presently Lyman Boulevard is a rural roadway in this location. 2. An access permit will be required from Carver County for the proposed access onto CSAH 19 (Galpin Blvd.) The information received did not include any information on proposed turn lanes, channelization, etc. to accommodate this access. That detail will be needed for the access application. 3. Any public utility lines that are to be installed within the County Road 18 or 19 right-of- way are subject to the utility permit requirements of Carver County. 4. Any proposed grading and installation of drainage sfrdctures'within the -right -'of -way of County Road 18 or 19 is subject to review and approval of Carver County. Carver County has concern about the closeness of the proposed pond to the CSAH 18 right of way. This area has many deep peat soil deposits. Has is been verified that this pond excavation will not jeopardize the existing road structure? Reconstruction of CSAH 18 is planned for the near future. Will this pond accommodate runoff and ponding needs from CSAH 18? 5. Development activities (including the installation of both public and private utilities needed to serve the development site) that result in any disturbance of the highway right-of-way (including tree removal, trench settlements, erosion, and sediment deposits) need to be completed in a manner that leaves the right-of-way in "as good or better condition" than what existed prior to construction. It is requested that the city include a provision in the developer's agreement that requires the developer to be ultimately responsible for the final condition of the county highway right-of-way. A clear understanding of this responsibility will result in fewer project oversight problems for both the county and the city. -- 6. Any trees or landscaping completed within the right -of --way must be approved by Carver County. When locating shrubs and trees, consideration should be given to maintaining an acceptable sight distance at the CR 19 intersection. Any trees or shrubs overhanging into the right-of-way could be subject to trimming for safety or overhead utility consideration. 7. As this area develops, traffic volumes will increase. Carver County considers any potential noise abatement improvements to be the responsibility of the developer. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposed plat. Sma - Spit Ch k �� 5531 Chaska, bi<�i 553i&2354 June 23, 2005 Robert Generous City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN. 55317 Re: Planning Case # 05-23 "Chanhassen West Business Park" The purposed business park. is served by two telephone companies. The western half is served by Sprint with the eastern half served by Qwest. Sprint is working with Qwcst to establish a boundary to determine who will provide service to which lots. According by the existing plan lots 1,2,6,7 and 8 would be served by Qwest with lots 4 and 5 served by Sprint with lot 3 to be determined. If you have any question regarding this application, please feel free to contact me at 952448-8354. Sincerely Pete May Network Engineer 1 Sprint of Minnesota, Inc. W01� zoos C1� CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ') I, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on. Thursday, July 7, 2005, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public Hearing for Chanhassen West Business 'Park'Rezoning, Planned Unit Development, Preliminary Plat Approval and Wetland Alteration Permit — Planning Case No. 05=23 to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said notice in an envelope addressed to such owner, and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mail with postage fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses of such owners were those appearing as such by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, and. by other appropriate records. Subscribed and sworn to before me thisl i-h day of , 2005. f Notary blic Kare . En tar t, Dqgty Clerk KIM T. MEUWISSEN Notary Public -Minnesota BCA UED Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, July 19 2005 at 7:00 R.m. Location: City Hall Council Chambers 7700 Market Blvd. Request for Rezoning of property from Agricultural Estate Proposal: District (A-2) to Planned Unit Development (PUD), Preliminary Plat Approval, and Wetland Alteration Permit Planning File: 05-23 Applicant: Eden Trace Corporation Property Northwest corner of the intersection of Lyman Boulevard and Location: Galpin Boulevard A location mae Is on the reverse side of this notice. The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the What Happens Public hearing through the following steps: at the Meeting: i • Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the proiect. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact. Bob Generous at 952.227-1131 or Questions & e-mail b enerousOci.chanhassen.mn.us. If you choose to Comments: submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. The staff report for this Item will be available online at http:11206.10.76.6/weblink7 the Thursday prior to the Planning Commission meeting. City Review Procedure: • Subdmsfons. Pianned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and interim Uses, Wetland Afteratiwts, Rezonings. Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commisskn. City ordinances require ad property within Soo feet of the subject s' a to be notified of the application in writing. Any interested party is invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent information and a recommendation. These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation. The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission %W close the public: hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council mayreverse, affirm or modify wholry or partly the Planrm V Commission's reoommendation. Aezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple maiority vote of the city Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to oommerdaVi ndustrial. • Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed Within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard. Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to Complete. Any person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting. • A neighborhood spokespersonlrepresentaWe Is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the project with any Interested person(s). + Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application win be included in the report to the City Council. It you wish to have someNng to be included In the rM2q, PIease contact the Pianirft Stall person named on thhe notl£icafion. Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting. Date & Time: Tuesday, July 19 2005 at 7:00 p.m. Location: City Hall Council Chambers 7700 Market Blvd. Request for Rezoning of property from Agricultural Estate Proposal: District (A-2) to Planned Unit Development (PUD), Preliminary Plat Approval, and Wetland Alteration Permit Planning File: 05-23 Applicant: Eden Trace Corporation Property Northwest corner of the intersection of Lyman Boulevard and Location: Galpin Boulevard A location map is on the reverse side of this notice. The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead 4D public hearing through the following steps: What Happens 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. at the Meeting: 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob Generous at 952.227-1131 or Questions & e-mail bgenerous@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. If you choose to Comments: submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. The staff report for this Item will be available online at htt ://206.10.76.6/weblink7 the ThursdaX 2rIor to the Planning Commission meeting. City Review Procedure: • Subdivisions. Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews. Conditional and interim Uses. Wetland Alterat Rezonings. Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning ComrNssim City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be nnotified of the apprcaWn In writing, Any interested parry is invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent information and a recanvnendWon. These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation; The item wit be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission wig close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify whoty or partly the Planting Commission's. recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to oornmerclaVundustriaf. • Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard. Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete, Any person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regardinng its status and schedurw* for the City Council meeting. • A neighborhood spokesperson/representative Is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal, Staff Is also available to review the project with any interested person(s). • Because the Planning C rivnisslon holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council, if you wish to have S4methi to be included in the report, please contact the Ptanninci Stall person named on the notification_ Disclaimer Ttss m¢p Is f6ther a Wpay recorded map nor a survey and is nairderxSed to be used as one, Ths rt V is a ewrpiia M of records. kft-a5on and data WtW in vafsws sty. corxVy, stage and federal of[tes and Otw $otxces mgwdrg the area Own and is to be used for retwence purposes o*y The City does rmt warrant that the GOWW is Ir mvftm System (GtS) D as used to prepare this map we error tree, and the City does not represom that the GM Data can be used for navigaraW, trail v or any ww purpose raging exacting meauxWnwd d distance or direction or wwsicn in Me depictiwt of 9euptap►iic teaaxes. It errors or discrepancies are found please ewntart 952-227.1107. The precedng dsdaimar is VvAded purscrant to 1dGrI*Saa Staitites §456.M WA 21 WW). and flea user d this map acknowledges that the City chart not be We 1Cr any d&Yogm and expressly w-- of dairm and sonar to derend, i ownty. and hdd harmless the City from any and a7 clam brouoht by US-. ft employees of agents, or third pasties wty arise out of the asses access or use of data PvAded Site .4'.. nn FA Thrs reap is r*Tw a kQW rem*d rrop nor a Survey and is not htwded 10 be used as one. This crop is a compaa4an of records, ntwrrGWn and data Ioexed In variars city, cw ty. Vz!o and federal M10" and oats[ 4wrCes regardng the area sfrown, and is to be used for rel%- purposes 0r1y, The City does not warrant drat the Geographic fntor VOM System (GFS) Oasa used to prepare this rrop are errot free, and the Cay does rlot represent lust Ole GiS Data can be used for nav Qaf*rW. tractor+? of any ottw purpose regtxt exaaing measwemtm of dstance or dramon or predsion in ft dapic5on a 2;*k featues_ ■ errors «discrepancies are found pieaw owe= 952.227.1107, The precedng dsdaimer is provided pursuant to Nfunesota Sea As 64W 03. WA 21 (2000). and the user d ttis reap a0mM dges that the City stW not be We for any dwmges, and expressly w9v" al dams. and agrees to defen4 tndemrify, and hdd bwydess me City Imm any and as daims brought by User. its employees or agents, or bird p aes wtti arise out of the users access or use of data provided. 1-9 «NAME» (NAMED ((ADD1» «ADD2» «CITY» ((STATE)> «ZIP»-«ZIP4» «Next Record»«NAME» aNAME1)) ((ADD1» «ADD2» «CITY)> ((STATE)), «ZIP»-(tZIP4)) ■ r ■ r 0 Public Head Notification Area(500 feetg ) Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 8470 Galpin Boulevard City of Chanhassen 1 � u PAP �1 50 M. TIME Op SCANNED Mli led efla 000 Wi 01 yt + a r _ t is�w�sAlrriecir ;. 1,51 VYWU kvoh •q �- y A � a� ,.� �``' �` ° ` �$ .air .��.t� � ' a .ur�` • +M rr L y - iC � � � t n � i h■. i, i1`l aL: is IM-1 AIMy+v ..Ar - .r 1 Created on: M -20-2005 This mapwas createdusing Carver 1Geographic Systems (GIS), it is a compilation of information and data from various City, County, State, and Federal offices. This map is not a surveyed or legally recordedmapandis intended to be ■as a reference. CarverCounty 0 4275 NOREX LLC 5354 PARKDALE DR MINNEAPOLIS , MN SS416 -1603 GINO R TENACE & ROBIN S MARSH-TENACE 2557 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.9372 CURTIS J & MARGARET A ZOERHOF 2530 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN . MN SS317.9372 DAVID E & MONICA L KILBER 2470 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 'TIMOTHY R CAHLANDER & KARLA B PLADSEN-CAHLANDER 2495 BRIDLE CREEKTRL CHANHASSEN . MN SM17 -9369 MICHAEL C & KRISTIN M MATTSON 2560 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.9372 FRANKJ & REBECCAA LAENGLE 2440 BRIDLE. CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -9369 JAY & FAITH M CUTLER 2430 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 STEVEN W & SARAH S DALE 2487 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 65317.9369 DANIEL R & SHELLEY R LUNA 2483 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -9369 ROGER A & GAYLEEN M SCHMIDT 8301 GALPIN BLVD CHANHASSEN . MN 55317.8413 JEFFREY A & CYNTHIA L OLSON 2520 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.9372 JEFFREY J & ANDREA R SEBENALER SCOTT T MURPHY & LORI A BOETTCHER-MURPHY 2499 BRIDLE CREEK TRL 2550 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.9369 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.9372 REILLY M DILLON & STEPHANIE GIMBLE-DILLON STEPHEN D & PATRICIA V PETERS 2542 BRIDLE CREEK TRL 2536 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.9372 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.9372 JEANNE M LINDBERG ALAN W JR & CATHERINE D HECHT 2480 BRIDLE CREEK TRL 2490 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN . MN 5S317 -9369 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.9369 ALEXANDER D 60NALDSON & STEVEN G & DEBORAH A WATTS ALETA M DONALDSON 2563 BRIDLE CREEK TRL 2460 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN . MN M17.9372 CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -9369 CRAIG W & DANA A JOHNSON THOMAS M & MARCIA A KLADSK 2460 BRIDLE CREEK TRL 2491 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.9369 CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -9369 LEGEND HOLDINGS LLC C/O LEWIS WILLIAM G & KAREN N LOOMIS 11750 OLD GEORGETOWN RD 2567 BRIDLE CREEK TRL APT 2202 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.9372 ROCKVILLE , MD 20852.2652 CHARLES L & BARBARA C NICKOLAY 2420 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 SCOTT & AMY C KAEHLER 2380 BRIDLE CREEK CIR . CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9338 SCOTT P & LESLIE M LOEHRER 2370 BRIDLE CREEK CIR CHANHASSEN , MN 56317.9338 KARILYNN VJRMEIER 2410 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 GENE M & BEVERLY G HERMES 2571 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 553i7 -9372 JEFFREY L & HANNAH R CROMETT 2471 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 SCANNED CLARENCE E & UEVA L SCHWDT 2461 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN ; MN 55317.9369 THOMAS J RADERMACHER & JOELLEN ANTONSON RAD£RMACHER 2479 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 56317.9369 PETER & LUANN SIDNEY 2431 BR10LE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN . MN 65317.9369 MARK & CHRISTINE FISCHER 2407 BRIDLE, CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.9369 RICHARD B BURY 4175 TRILLIUM LN E MOUND D. MN M64 -7730 JEFFREY D & REBECCA R BRICK 2365 BRIDLE. CREEK CIR CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -9338 WILLIAM G JR & PAMELA FRANZEN 2370 STONE CREEK LN W CHANHASSEN . MN 55317.7413 LBI ACQUISITION CORP CVO CHEF SOLUTIONS: L PETRICH 20 N MARTINGALE. SOITE 600 SCHAUMBURG , IL 60173.2417 WILLIAM A & L08MNE RODRIGUEZ 2357 STONE CREEK LN W CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7413 THOMAS E & MARY K WITEK 2318 STONE CREEK OR CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7403 i 0 CRAIG V & NINA F WALLESTAD ANGILBERTO HERNANDEZ & 2475 BRIDLE CREEK TRL LAURIE HERNANDEZ 2451 CHANHASSEN , MN 5CHA 5317.9369 BRIDLE CREEK TRL HANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 PAUL M & CONSTANCE M PALMER STEVEN J & NANCY J CAVANAUGH 2360 BRIDLE CREEK CIR 2441 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN M17.9338 CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -9369 BARRY & MARY L LABOUNTY RODNEY H & JANICE C MELTON 2421 BRIDLE CREEK TRL 2413 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN . MN 65317 -9369 CHANHASSEN . MN 55317.9369 ANDREW M DINGMAN & CALVIN DISCHER STEPHANIE J DINGMAN 6476 WOODLAND RD 2403 BRIDLE CREEK TRL MINNETONKA , MN SW45 -5658 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317-9369 SAMUEL 0 & KIhABERLY A STIELE MERLE D & JANE VOLK 2375 BRIDLE CREEK CIR 16925 CO RD 40 CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -9388 CARVER. MN 55315.9635 0 CHARLES E & DIANA L KIRCHOFF KEVIN M & CATHLEEN A DILORENZO 2355 BRIDLE CREEK CIR 2382 STONE CREEK LN W CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.9338 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7413 JAMES A & LAURIE LISIGNOLI CHARLES 0 & ERIN M BUSALACCHI 2356 STONE CREEK LN W 2342 STONE CREEK LN W CHANHASSEN , MN 66317 -7413 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.7413 TOM & SOMMANA MONTHISANE RICHARD B & CHRYSAUNA A BURN 2381 STONE. CREEK LN W 2369 STONE CREEK LN W CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7413 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.7413 DAVID G & YAEL M RUBIN BRIAN C & SALLY L SNABB 2345 STONE CREEK LN W 2333 STONE CREEK LN W CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 7413 CHANHASSEN , MN 65317 -7413 JEFFREY J & ABIGAIL M WILSON MARK SUNDQUIST 2332 STONE CREEK OR 2374 STONE CREEK OR CHANHASSEN . MN 65317 -7403 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7403 JAMES D & TRACI L LEONARD 2360 STONE CREEK DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317.7403 RODDY Y & LAURIE LW ZIVKOVICH 2337 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN. MN 65317.7401 DANIELJ & PAMELAJ CULHANE 2333 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 7401 JEFFREY J & KARLA M ALTHOFF 2326 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN, MN SS317.7401 CHARLENE A STENDER 2321 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -7401 DONALD W & CATHY BORGMANN 2308 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -7401 DELORIS B HOLASEK LIVING TRUST CJO DELORIS HOLASEK 8610 GALPIN BLVD CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -9413 JOHN F & LAURIE SULLIVAN 2346 STONE CREEK DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -7403 THOMAS V & BEVERLY LANTILLEY 2361 STONE CREEK DR CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -7403 ALOTA PROPERTIES LLC 4035 NOREX DR CHASKA, MN 55318.3043 g KELLY K MORLOCK & SARA B ROMANSKI•MORLOCK 2325 BOULDER RD . CHANHASSEN. MN M17 7401 THE NORDICK GROUP INC 67512TH AVE NE WEST FARGO , N D 58078 -= JOSHUA T KRIENKE & CHRISTINA A KRIENKE 2376 STONECREEK DR CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -7403 JOEL E.& HEIDI M LEHRKE 2329 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -7401 DOUGLAS VERNON JOHNSON 2322 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317.7401 JAMES M & JENNIFER D LARRANAGA DOUGLAS G & SARA tP HIPSKIND 2318 BOULDER RD 2317 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 7401 CHANHASSEN, MN M17 -7401 RORY D & AMY J LEA 2313 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -7401 SCOTTT'& NICOLE M BRUSH 2301 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 7401 RICHARD F RIEGERT CHASKA WATERTOWER MINE CIO RIEKER ENTERPRISES 7$75 187TH 5T 149JONATHAN BLVD N BELLE pLAINE , MN 56011 -8932 CHASKA, MH 55318.2342 GERHARD & HELENE A SCHOCK 2309 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -7401 MICHAEL & JACQUELINE R MROSKO 2305 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -7401 NEWDOC NEWDOC Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 23 of 26 storm drainage system including storm water ponds, drainage swales, emergency overflows, access routes for maintenance, over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, and buffer areas used as PVC. The minimum easement width shall be 20 feet wide. 32. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. 33. Private utility easements are required for the sanitary sewer and water lines that serve Lot 4 but go through Lot 5. 34. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against. the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. 35.On the site plan: a. Revise the cul-de-sac pavement radius to 48 feet. b. Revise the parking driveway aisle from 24 feet to 26 feet wide. c. Revise the public street width from 32 feet to 36 feet wide. d. Increase the full access width off Galpin Boulevard to 44 feet and create three lane access. e. Shift Lots 1 and 8 easterly access further toward the west and realign the across each other. =., L Show at least one, 6-foot wide, side walk along the public street. g. Show the access off Galpin Boulevard turning curb radius. h. 'Realign lot: 5 access perpendicular to the shared driveway. i. Show street lights. j. Show handicap parks and ramps. 36.On the grading plan: a. Extend silt fence type between the storm pond and Outlot A. Silt fence Type II must be used adjacent to wetlands and storm pond. b. Revise contour lines to match 3:1 maximum slope and tie the proposed contour lines with the existing contours for Lots 4, 5, south of Lot 2 and northeast of Lot 1. c. Show the proposed contour lines for Lot 6. d. Show all retaining walls top and bottom elevations. e. Show all emergency overflows (EOF). The EOF must be 1.5' lower than the adjacent lowest floor. f. Revise Lot 6 parking slope to 0.7% minimum. g. Add a note to remove any existing structure and access off Galpin Boulevard and all disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. h. Show 75-foot minimum construction rock entrance. i. No retaining walls structure is allowed within public street and/or public utility easements, revise accordingly. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 Jury 19, 2005 Page 24 of 26 j. Show 20-foot utility easement for the storm sewer between Lots 2 and 3 37.On the utility plans: a. Show all existing and proposed drainage and utility easements. b. Show the proposed sanitary and storm sewer stubs inverts. c. Add storm sewer schedule. d. Public storm sewer pipe type must be RCP and 15-inch minimum diameter. e. The last street accessible storm manhole (STMH#2) must be built with a sump. f Revise sanitary sewer pipe from DIP to PVC-C900. g. On the utility profile show all sewer and pipe crossings. h. Minimum vertical separation must be 18 inches between watermain and sewer. i. Call out watermain fittings 38. Any retaining wall over four feet in height must be designed by a registered Civil Engineer in the state of Minnesota with an approved safety fence on top of it. Also, it will require a building permit from the Building Department. 39. Add the following City of Chanhassen Detail Plate Nos. 1002, 2109, 21.10 2204, 3104, 3109, 5201, 5205, 5214 and 5215. 40. Prior to final plat approval, a professional civil engineer registered in the state of Minnesota must sign all plans. 41. All of the ponds are required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. 42. Cross -access easements for the shared driveway accesses must be obtained and recorded against the lots for each of the entrance drives. 43. Any off -site grading will require easements from the appropriate property owner. 44. Public utility improvements will be required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required at the time of final platting. The applicant will also be required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. The applicant must be aware that all public utility improvements will require a preconstruction meeting before building permit issuance. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. 45. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes and traffic control plans. The applicant should be aware that any off -site grading will require an easement from the Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 25 of 26 appropriate property owner. 46. All private streets are required to have 24-foot wide paved streets from back -of -curb to back - of -curb, be built to a 7-ton design and contained within a 40-foot wide private easement. At the completion of the project, the developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 7-tan design. 47. Six-foot wide sidewalks are required. 48. All plans must be signed by a registered engineer in the state of Minnesota. 49. All of the proposed building pads must have a rear yard elevation at least three feet above the HWL of the adjacent ponds. 50. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's Building Department. 51. Comply with Carver County memo dated June 28, 2005 and revise the plans accordingly. 52. Revise plan sheet size to 24 x 36 using scale 50. " C. "The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of the Wetland Alteration Permit to fill and alter wetlands within the development, plans prepared by Schoell &Madson, Inc., dated June 17, 2005, subject to the following conditions: 1. A no loss determination shall be completed for Basin F 31-34. 2. Exemption requests shall be completed for Basins.F 51-80 N, Basin F 91-97 and Wetland A. 3. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). A Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for Water/Wetland Projects (Parts I and H) shall be submitted for the proposed project. The application shall include sequencing discussions and sequencing flexibility requests, if applicable. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. 4. A five-year wetland replacement monitoring plan shall be submitted. The replacement. monitoring plan shall include a detailed management plan for invasive non-native species, particularly purple loosestrife and reed canary grass. The plans shall show fixed photo monitoring points for the replacement wetland. The applicant shall provide proof of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland. 5. Several corrections must be made to the Wetland Mitigation Plan (sheet 10 of 13): a. Wetland A is shown as an impact area. Upon finalization of exemption paperwork, mitigation will not be required for this wetland; MEMORANDUM- 9 TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager FROM: Bob Generous, Senior Planner CTrltp OF DATE: August 22, 2005 CUANUASSEN SUB': Chanhassen West Business Park — Planning Case #05-23 7700Marketlrard PE} MN 5531 r MN {�A EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Administration This item was tabled by City Council at the August 8, 2005 meeting to permit staff AMW227.11100 F=%2.227.1110 and the developer to investigate a right-inlright-out on Lyman Boulevard. Based on discussions with the developer, the inclusion of a second access to Lyman Boulevard Building Inspections would lead to the reduction of Outlot A by approximately 42%. This would Ph m%2227.1180 significantly reduce the amount of tree preservation in Outlot C. Additionally, staff F=952227.1190 has incorporated changes to the design standards and conditions of approval based on Engineering City Council direction. ,. Pt 952227.tt60 F=%2227.1170 The following revisions were made to the design standards: Finance ftre_952227.1140 Section b. Prohibited Uses: added "outdoor speakers or public address systems". Fax 952.227,1110 = Section d. Development Standards, subsection 4. Building height shall be limited to 3 Parts & Recreation Ptm 952227.1t20 stories or 40 feet, except for -Lot 5, Block 2 (Lot 5) and Lot 3, Block-1 (Lot 6) which Fat952227.1110 shall have a building height limit of 2 stories and 30 feet including parapet. pmeatim Center 2310Cor er6a,$=d Section f. Site Landscaping and Screening, subsection 2. Storage of material outdoors fte 952227.1400 is prohibited unless it has been approved under site plan review. All approved outdoor Fax 952.227.1404 storage must be screened with berms, fences, walls and/or landscaping. Planning & Natural Resources Section g. Signage, add subsection 7. Lighted signs, which are illuminated either Ptr 952.227.1130 internally or externally, are prohibited. Fay %2227.1110 ` Public Works Section h. Lighting, add subsection 5. Site lighting shall be directed toward the 15911'arkltoad interior of individual lots. Rm 952.227.1300 ; Fax952.227.1310 Additionally, staff has modified the conditions of approval for the preliminary plat as s Senior Center follows: Phone 952227.1125 Farc952227,1110 Deleted condition 48 — All plans must be signed by a registered engineer in the state Web Site of Minnesota.. (duplicates condition 40) wuvw�.us Modified condition 53 — The developer shall eidwf dedicate Outlot C to the City for,,, open space purposes ef and dedicate a conservation easement over Outlot C. - Modified condition 54 — The applicant shall work with staff to resolve any drainage issues with Lot 2 in Trotters Ridge and Lots 5,6 and Outlot C of the development. In response to the residents' concerns regarding increased traffic volumes on Galpin Boulevard resulting from the proposed development, the developer hired TDI, a scwtM The City of Chanhassen* AgrowigCoTmr tywithdeanlakes, quality schools,acham*dowritmthrivdrsgbusir�=,windingu Is, and be3OMpark$,Agueplace to1ive.work,andAY, Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case #05-23 August 22, 2005 Page 2 of 2 traffic consultant, to analyze the traffic patterns for the proposed site plan and if a right -in, right -out on Lyman Boulevard was constructed. TDI used the Institute of Traffic Engineer's Trip Generation Manual to estimate 2,400 trip ends per day (1,200 entering and 1,200 exiting the site). The estimated traffic volume correlates with actual traffic counts from the business park on Lake Drive, west Of Audubon Road; the traffic count for this area was 2,478 trip ends (1,239 entering and 1,239 exiting). The business park west of Audubon has approximately 357,838 s.f. of office/industrial space, which is almost equal to the proposed 350,000 s.f: within Chanhassen West Business Park. TDI estimates that 65% of the traffic to Chanhassen West Business Park will be to and from the east on Lyman Boulevard, 15% will be to and from the north on Galpin Boulevard, and 15% will be to and from the west on Lyman Boulevard. Based on this trip distribution, TDI determined that a right - in, right -out on Lyman Boulevard would not significantly improve the function of the Galpin Boulevard/Stone Creek Drive intersection since the morning peak traffic leaving the Stone Creek development will precede the morning peak traffic of the employees, customers and deliveries to and from the business park. The Galpin Boulevard and Lyman Boulevard intersection will be controlled by a traffic signal in the future. When the signal is installed, an acceleration lane for southbound Galpin to westbound. Lyman traffic will be constructed. If a right -in, right -out access from Lyman Boulevard is allowed, a deceleration lane must be constructed. TDI predicts vehicular conflict between acceleration lane and deceleration lane traffic. Based on the minimal change in function of the Galpin Boulevard/Stone Creek Drive intersection and the safety issue due to the acceleration and deceleration lanes on Lyman Boulevard, TDI recommends that the right -in, right -out on Lyman Boulevard not be constructed. TDI's report and recommendation was forwarded to Carver County. Based on the findings in TDI's report and Lyman Boulevard's designation as an east -west corridor, the County Engineer will not allow any access onto Lyman Boulevard. In addition, the right -in, right -out access to Lyman would not have met the City's access spacing requirement. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the motions, beginning on page 19, as specified in the staff report dated July .19, 2005. ATTACHMENTS I. Memo from Mike Spack (TDI) to Ben Merriman dated 8115105. 2. .Email from Dan Luna to Bob Generous dated 8/11/05. 3. Email from Lu Ann Sidney to Bob Generous dated 8/10/05. 4. Email from Sarah Dale to Bob Generous dated 8/10105. 5. Email from JoEllen and Tom Radermacher to Bob Generous dated 8/10/05. 6. Letter to Chanhassen City Council Members from Dee and Jeff McGuire date July 27, 2005. 7. Planning Commission staff report dated July 19, 2005 (without attachments). 8. Reduced copy of preliminary plat. glp1aa12005 planning cases105.23 cbanhassen west business parklexecutive summary 2.doc Data Collection Traffic Engineering Transportation Planning - Memo To: Ben Merriman, Center Companies, LLC From. Mike Spack, P.E. Date: 811 512005 Re: Chanhassen West Business Park Access 3268 Xenwood Ave S St. Louis Park, MN 55416 phone 952.926.0916 fax 866.651.5058 � www.trafficdatainc.com mspack@trafficdatainc.com Background An eight lot business park is proposed for the northwest comer of C.S.A.H.18 (Lyman Blvd) and C.S.A.H.19 (Galpin Blvd) in Chanhassen, MN. The site is proposed to have full access on Galpin Blvd at Stone Creek Dr. The site's access is proposed to become the westerly leg of the existing Galpin Blvd/Stone Creek Dr tee intersection. Residents east of Galpin Blvd are concerned with having all of the business park traffic using the Galpin Blvd/Stone Creek Dr intersection. They use this intersection to get in and out of their subdivision. Questions were raised about the impact of adding a right-in/right-out access on Lyman Blvd for the site. Carver County has stated that they prefer that the site does not access Lyman Blvd. The city anticipates a traffic signal being constructed at the Lyman Blvd/Galpin Blvd in approximately three years. The new Highway 212 alignment is under eonstniction south of the site and is anticipated to be complete in the same time frame. These factors will affect future traffic conditions near the site. The purpose of this memorandum is to forecast the traffic volumes that will enter and exit the site with and without a right inlright-out access on Lyman Blvd. Recommendations are made regarding the right-inlright-out access based on these forecasts. Traffic Forecasts The size and character of the proposed business park is very similar to a business park in Chanhassen located on Lake Drive west of Audubon Rd. The city collected daily traffic volumes at the existing business park and found that it generated approximately 2,400 trips per day (1,200 vehicles entering and 1,200 vehicles exiting). A trip generation analysis was performed for the site based on the methods Ben Merriman Page 2 Chanhassen West Business Parts and rates published in the lTE Trip Generation Manual, 7 h Edition to determine the amount of traffic that will be generated by the site during the a.m. and p.m. weekday peak hours. The results are shown in Table 1. Table 1 Trip Generation Mse aA TRIOr .tee io e..Mr UN?u lea 770 Business Park 2,400 237 32 56 187 Notes: Daily trips combine the entering and exiting trips over the 24 hour period. Based on existing traffic volumes, population centers, and the anticipated completion of the new Highway 212 alignment, the directional trip distribution for the business park is anticipated to be approximately; • 65% to/from the east on Lyman Blvd • 15% to/from the west on Lyman Blvd • 20% tolfrom the north on Galpin Blvd The a.m. peak hour, p.m. peak hour, and daily trips generated by the site were distributed to the area roadways per these trip distributions. The trips that will be added to the area roadway network (with and without the right-in/right-out access on Lyman Blvd) are shown in Figure 1. Conclusions and Recommendations The only turning movement that has the potential to significantly impact the residents entering and exiting their subdivision through the Galpin Blvd/Stone Creek Dr intersection will be the northbound to westbound left turn into the business park. These turns will conflict with the westbound to southbound left that the majority of the residents will make when the Highway 212 construction is completed. The business park traffic will not conflict significantly with residents east of Galpin Drive during-mostofthe day. There will be approximately 190 vehicles making the northbound to westbound left turn at the Galpin Blvd/Stone Creek Dr intersection during the morning peak hour if the site has only one access as proposed. This will add delay to residents trying to leave the subdivision during the morning, but it is difficult to quantify this impact because the residents leaving to go to work will leave before the majority of the employees, customers, and deliveries arrive at the business park. The number of vehicles leaving the proposed site that would use the right -out onto Lyman Blvd is low and this will not significantly ease traffic for the residents east of Galpin Blvd. These vehicles would present a safety problem as they try to accelerate to match the traffic on Lyman Blvd. In addition, it is difficult to build an effective right -out that blocks vehicles from making a left turn unless a median is built on Lyman Blvd. The right -out is not recommended. Ben Merriman Page 3 Chanhassen West Business Park A right -in access to the site from Lyman Blvd would slightly reduce the number of vehicles that would conflict with the residents east of Galpin Blvd. On average, it would reduce the conflicting vehicles from approximately 3 per minute to 3 per every two minutes during the morning rush hour. When the signal is built at the Galpin Blvd/Lyman Blvd intersection, an acceleration lane for southbound to westbound right turns will likely also be built. This acceleration would happen at the point where vehicles would be decelerating to turn into the right -in access on Lyman Blvd. This conflict of accelerating and decelerating vehicles being mixed at the same point poses a safety issue. The right -in access is not recommended because the improvement in traffic flow for the residents would be minimal and it may cause safety problems in the future when the Lyman Blvd/Galpin Blvd intersection is controlled with a traffic signal. N is M ii Stone Cr( �a s► s J 0 21 1 26 3 0� w as LO Q 0. T CD N � p � *J L 95 ! NA *j to t■■ 59 154 361136 1.1 A.M. Peak Hour C N N t �Q e o ds z a° IX CO ,J L 221 H.18 1 Eli fn 1 l T C6 4J v Stone Creek Dr 37 37 I J 122 150 ■3 u� M CO N N N T O N � �► L 15 f37 C.S.A.H.18 8 8 jJ (Lyman Bvd) P.M. Peak Hour F-C4 Z m p a Q. v m , Stone Creek Dr V 240 240 J 780 960 Z m rn a CO m CO O p I� 300 780 C,S,A,H. 18 180 180 ■j (Lyman Bvd) Daily Traffic Volumes LEGEND with Right-in/Right-out QE `without Right-in/Right-out xxx 1 Figure 1 - Traffic Added by Business Park Chanhassen West Business Paris _Vn Chanhassen. MN Prepared by TDI August 2005 ■ Generous, Bob From: Dan Luna [yoopr 1999_2000@yahoo.comj Sent: Thursday, August 11, 200510:08 AM To: Generous, Bob Subject: Chan West Business Park Mr. Generous, I understand you.and members of the city staff will meet this week with Eden Trace to discuss the Chanhassen West Business Park as a follow-up to the Aug. 8 City Council meeting and directive. i would like to express my concern that any revisions to the plan not have a negative impact on the residents in Trotters Ridge. I am most concerned about the right in and right out. I would not, be happy if a .right -in, right -out plan is developed, if its effect is to cut into Outlot C or increase the size.of Buildings 5 &.6. Such a trade-off is unacceptable to our neighborhood. While I understand and sympathize with the traffic concerns of the Stone. Creek neighborhood, both Galpin and Lyman are County Roads and in and out should be done on the road the County sees fit. The traffic studies were done and no need to rehash. Ido not feel that more pavement and bigger buildings are a solution to perceived traffic problems_. I.believe we had an agreement to install a berm between Outlot B and Building 5 but it was not on the landscape plan displayed to City Council. We believe that berm is just as critical to those of us in the back of Trotter's Ridge to helping visually separate the building from our development as the proposed berm is in the northeast corner of, the development. I feel the developer has worked hard and has been fair trying to accommodate our concerns. r am concerned that if we ask the developer to go back to the "drawing board", the developer may not wish to be as easy to work: with in the future. I just wanted to express our concerns prior to the meetings so you were aware of them. .Thank you for your time and efforts as we all work through this proposal. Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com Pagel of 1 Generous, Bob From: Lu Ann Sidney [LASidney@msn.comj Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2005 3:29 PM To: Generous, Bob Cc: Aanenson, Kate Subject: Chanhassen West Business Park Dear Mr. Generous: I understand you will be meeting with Ben Merriman tomorrow to follow up the direction given by City Council on August 8. One of the points for discussion will be the possible addition of a second access point to the development on Lyman as a right -in, right -out access. I am concerned this type of change to the current plan would negatively affect the properties to the north in Trotters Ridge by potentially increasing the size of Bldg. 5 and removing more mature trees from the area of Outlot C. These changes would be permanent. While the traffic situation on Gaipin might be temporp arils eased a bit with an additional right -in, right -out on Lyman, once 312 goes in, I would expect most of the traffic to be directed east. The west right -out of the development on Lyman would probably not be used extensively. Also, when signals are placed at Galpin and Lyman, I. expect the traffic to and from the development would shift toward that intersection. The second access on Lyman, in my opinion, would become a dead end, serving nothing. I also believe any construction of an access point on Lyman is rem mature and if it were to be done, construction should occur at the time of any upgrade of that particular section of Lyman Blvd. Thank you in advance for your consideration of the above points. Best regards, Lu Ann Sidney 8/11/2005 Page 1 of 1 Generous, Bob From: Sarah Dale iss.dale@worldnet.att.netj Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 200510:27 AM To: Generous, Bob Cc: Aanenson, Kate; LASidney@msn.com Subject: Chanhassen West Business Park Importance: Nigh Mr. Generous, understand you and other members of city staff are meeting this week with Eden Trace to discuss the Chanhassen West Busines Park as a follow-up to the Aug. 8 City Council meeting and directive. As you do, I wanted to express my concern - and those of my neighbors - that any revisions to the plan not have a detrimental impact upon the residents of the Trotter's Ridge neighborhood. Speficially, if a right -in, right -out plan is developed, we would not be happy if its effect is to cut into Outlot C or increase the size of Buildings 5 & 6. Such a trade-off is unacceptable to us. While I understand and sympathize with the traffic concerns of the Stone Creek neighborhood, we are much more concerned with how the development will impact us daily - and more intimately - in our backyards. In addition, I have expressed concern to City Council already because we had talked with the developer and believed we had an agreement to install a berm between Outlot B and Building 5 but it was not on the landscape plan displayed to City Council. We believe that berm is just as critical to those of us in the back of Trotter's Ridge to helping visually separate the building from our development as the proposed berm is in the northeast comer of the development. just wanted to express our concerns prior to the meetingsso you were aware of them. I thank you for your time and patience as we all work through this proposal. Sarah Sturmon Date ss.dale @ worldn et.att.net s/11/2005 Page 1 of It Generous, Bob From: JoEllen & Tom Hatchann@tcintemet.net] Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2005 5:00 PM To: Generous, Bob Cc: Aanenson, Kate; 'LA Sidneyo@msn.com Subject: Chanhassen West Business Park Dear Mr. Generous, have been informed that you and the city staff will be meeting this week to discuss the Chanhassen West Business Park with the developer, Eden Trace Corp. I understand that this meeting is a follow-up to the City Council meeting of Monday, August 81h to discuss the right -in, right -out onto Lyman Blvd. am writing to you as I do not feel this is a beneficial change to the residents of Trotter's Ridge. I understand that this change may increase the size of buildings 5 & 6 and cut into outlot C. Any or all of these changes would result in a major impact to us. It appears that the use of Lyman Blvd. is expected to change in the near future and this change could reduce the need for the right -in, right -out. While I understand the traffic concerns of Stone Creek, the daily view of a larger building from our homes would not change and the loss of some very significant oak trees could also not be changed. We have appreciated the cooperation of this developer in answering our questions and addressing our concerns. This does include a written agreement from Eden Trace to add a berm between Building 5 and Outlot B that we provided at the City Council meeting. As the wetland area provides no trees, this berm and the plantings is very important to us and we would like to see this included in the conditions as part of the landscape plans. thank you for taking the time to review these concerns. JoEllen Radermacher 2479 Bridle Creek TH. 8/11/2005 osr�3 CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED AUG 12005 July 27, 2005 CHANHASSEN PLANN[NG flEP= Dear Chanhassen City Council Members, Our family resides in the Stone Creek subdivision which is across the street from a proposed office complex at the intersections of Galpin Boulevard and Lyman Boulevard. We have been out of town the past two weeks and have missed the meetings about this property. We believe our community doesn't need commercial development next to upscale single family homes and we have serious concerns regarding this specific site. 1. Volume & Type of Traffic We are already experiencing heavy volumes of traffic on Galpin Boulevard and feel it prudent to ask for a new traffic study to be done before final approval is granted for new construction. School buses for middle schools East and West, Pioneer Ridge Freshman Center, Chaska High School and Bluff Creek Elementary all run along Galpin Boulevard. There are in fact several stops on Galpin. These buses often times park along Galpin near our subdivision during the day between stops. One of our children is dropped off on Galpin as the bus doesn't turn into our subdivision on its afternoon run. Has there been outreach to the bus company to check their routes? What happens when the new secondary school is built next year just east on -Lyman across the railroad tracks? Certainly we would not expect construction traffic to be coming'in and out onto GalpiwBoulevard in -front of our subdivision. L What about all of the semi -truck traffic? , 2. Arterial Roads What are the near term and long term plans for development of Lyman Boulevard with regard to the 212 extension, this development, and future development of the nursery property to the south of this site, the new secondary school and other undeveloped land within a 5 mile radius? How will the new residential neighborhoods going in across from the Autumn Woods subdivision impact the traffic at the intersection of Lyman and Galpin? 3. Proposed Entrance & Site Design It is difficult to enter and exit out of our subdivision now and it is unlikely, given our proximity to the intersection at Lyman, that we would get a stop light. What plans for traffic management: have been considered? In our view an entrance off of Lyman would be a better solution for a commercial development with appropriate traffic signals and:, turn lanes installed at the intersection of Lyman and Galpin '•a A SCANKM Further, should the development be approved, appropriate sized berming and landscaping similar to the Stone Creek side of Galpin should be mandatory on the cast side of this development as appears to be incorporated on the north side of the site. 4. Trails & Sidewalk Disruption What is the plan for reducing the impact for community residents, especially children on bicycles? What are the plans for trail access across this new property development? 5. Hours of Operation, Noise & Lighting We assume the community will be provided with the specific limitations of each of these prior to final approval by the city council. Wouldn't this development make more sense near Lifetime Fitness or across from the new CVS Pharmacy off of Highway 5? What is the occupancy rate of this developer's current project south of. Highway 5? Does Chanhassen need more light office space? We urge you to give serious consideration to this site development. There are not a lot of newer Chanhassen neighborhoods commingling with office space. We certainly don't want to see a negative impact on the residential character of this area or on the housing values - that would hurt us all. Sincerely, ee & Jeff Mc ui 2272 Stone Creek Lane E. (952) 470-4420 Cc: Carver County Engineers / Chanhassen Planning Commission ✓ Carver County -'Board of Commissioners Chaska City Council Chaska Planning Commission MN DOT Stone Creek Homeowners Association Z U H STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Request for Rezoning of property from Agricultural Estate District (A-2) to Planned Unit Development (PUD), Preliminary Plat Approval, and Wetland Alteration Permit — Chanhassen West Business Park. LOCATION: APPLICANT: The northwest corner of the intersection of Lyman Boulevard and Galpin Boulevard Eden Trace Corporation 8156 Mallory Court Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 361-0722 Volk Minger Partnership P. O. Box 236 Chanhassen, MN 553.17 (952) 470-1753 PRESENT ZONING: Agricultural Estate District, A2 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Office/Industrial ACREAGE: 40.15 acres DENSITY: F.A.R 0.18 — 0.33 SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant in proposing an Office -Industrial Planned Unit development consisting of eight lots and three outlots with a wetland alteration permit to fill and alter wetlands within the development. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION INDECISION -MAKING: The City has a relatively high level of discretion in approving rezonings, PUD's, and amendments to PUD's because the City is acting in its legislative or policy making capacity. A rezoning or PUD, and amendment thereto, must be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The City's discretion in approving or denying a preliminary plat is limited to whether or not the proposed plat meets the standards outlined in the Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Ordinance. If it meets these standards, the City must approve the preliminary plat. This is a quasi judicial decision. Location Map Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 8470 Galpin Boulevard City of Chanhassen SCANNED Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05 23 July I9, 2005 Page 2 of 27 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant is proposing an office -industrial Planned Unit Development. The development consists of eight lots, three outlots and public right-of-way. The developer proposes creation of a common open space to preserve wooded areas within the development. Access is proposed at the existing driveway entrance off Galpin Boulevard. Ponding for the development is proposed in the southwest corner of the project. Water and sewer service are available to the site. The purpose of this development is to create a PUD light industrial/office park. The use of the PUD zone is to allow for more flexible development while creating a higher quality and more sensitive proposal. The standards are partially based on the uses within the Industrial Office Park District (IOP), but provide additional requirements not included in the IOP district. The PUD design standards will be incorporated in an ordinance which will regulate the development of the site. The property to the north is a residential single-family subdivision, Trotters Ridge, which is zoned Planned Unit Development -Residential. The property to the east, across Galpin Boulevard, is a residential single-family subdivision, Stone Creek, which is zoned Single -Family Residential. The property to the south, across Lyman Boulevard, contains the Holasek nursery, which is currently zoned Agricultural Estate District and is guided for Office/Industrial use. Both Galpin Boulevard and Lyman Boulevard are classified as minor arterial roadways in the City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan. Minor arterial roadways are intended and designed to carry higher traffic volumes. As the city continues to grow, Galpin Boulevard will provide mobility for north -south traffic flow to destinations within the city as well as the regional transportation system. The property has abandoned farming uses on the northern and eastern portions of the site; abandoned mining and excavating operation on the western and southwest portions of the property; and landscaping and contracting operations are located on the central portion of the property. A house is located in the southeast corner of the property. Three large wetland areas are located in the east central, northwest, and southwest of the property. The site is significantly wooded in the north central area. The property has a high point of approximately 980 feet in the north central area and a low point of .940 feet in the southwest corner of the property. The property is bounded by Galpin and Lyman Boulevards. Staff is recommending that the preliminary Planned Unit Development, preliminary plat and wetland alteration permit be approved. BACKGROUND On August 12,1996, City Council denied a Land Use Map Amendment #96-1b from Office/Industrial to Residential Medium Density'for the northerly 22.6 acres, conceptual and preliminary approval of PUD #96-2, preliminary plat approval for 23 lots and associated right- of-way, Site Plan Review #96-5 approval for 140 townhouse units, and Wetland Alteration Permit #95-2b. In the summer of 1995, Scherber Partnership Properties requested a land use map amendment from Office/Industrial to Residential - Low Density, a rezoning to Single Family Residential, Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 3 of 27 RSF, and preliminary plat approval to permit 59 single-family lots. City staff recommended denial of the land use map amendment and consequently the rezoning and subdivision. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend denial of the development, and the City Council tabled the item, with the consent of the applicant, to permit staff and the applicant to work out a compromise for the development of the parcel. However, in February, 1996, the applicant formally withdrew the development application. On February 13, 1987, City Council approved CUP #87-1 for a landscape contractor's yard and a wholesale nursery and a variance to permit a contractor's yard within one mile of an existing contractors yard (on the same property). On November 19, 1984, the City Council approved a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), #84-13, to permit a contractors yard for & W Sanitation on the southeasterly 32 acres of the site. Such approval included the storage and repair of garbage trucks. The property was zoned R-IA, Agricultural Residence District. On November 19, 1984, the City Council also approved CUP #84-14 for a contractor's yard to include the storage and repair of construction equipment. In April, 1982, the property owner, Volk, applied for a building permit to reconstruct a pole barn which had collapsed due to heavy snow. The building permit was denied because the storage and repair of excavating equipment in the pole barn was not a permitted use in the R-1A district at that time. Mr. Volk petitioned the Council on May 17, 1982 to issue the building permit. The City Council approved the issuance of the building permit subject to Mr. Volk applying for a rezoning request from R-lA to I-1. Mr. Volk made an application for the rezoning and a comprehensive land use plan amendment. On June 25, 1982, the Planning Commission recommended denial of the request. The City Council considered the request on October 4, 1982. The Council tabled the item until staff completed a survey of all contractors' yards as well as other non -conforming uses in the city. The City Council amended the Zoning Ordinance to allow contractor's yards as CUPs in the R-1A zone on August 20, 1984. On November 12, 1980, a rezoning request from R-1A to I-1 on the parcel was considered by the Planning Commission. At that meeting, the request was revised to an ordinance amendment to permit contractors' businesses and storage yards as conditional uses in the R-1A district. The Planning Commission recommended denial of the request. The City Council subsequently denied the request on January 5, 1981. REZONING Justification for Rezoninp, to PUD The applicant is requesting to rezone approximately 45 acres from A2, Agricultural Estate District, to PUD, Planned Unit Development for an OfficelIndustrial Park. The project consists of eight lots. This property was one of four areas designated for Office/Industrial use as part of the 1991 comprehensive plan update. The review criteria are taken from the intent section of the PUD Ordinance. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 4 of 27 Section 20-501. Intent Planned unit developments offer enhanced flexibility to develop a site through the relaxation of most normal zoning district standards. The use of the PUD in this instance is to permit impervious surface clustering within the development in order to preserve a significant area of trees. The use of the PUD zoning also allows for an internal transfer of site coverage. In exchange for this enhanced flexibility, the City has the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the other more standard zoning districts. The proposed development provides a compatible development with the surrounding development subject to the recommended modifications to the plan. The proposed and rezoning assist in the furtherance of the following land use goals of the City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan: Recognizing that some uses pay their own way in terms of the property taxes generated and some uses do not, Chanhassen will strive for a.mixture of development which will assure it financial future. Development will be encouraged within the MUSA line. Planned industrial development will be encouraged as a means of encouraging tax base growth and creating new employment opportunities. Development should be phased in accordance with the ability of the city to provide services. Development shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS Staff is proposing the following development standards govern the development of the property. Development Standards a. Intent The purpose of this zone is to create a PUD light industrial/office park. The use of the PUD zone is to allow for more flexible design standards while creating a higher quality and more sensitive proposal. All utilities are required to be placed underground. Each lot proposed for development shall proceed through site plan review based on the development standards outlined below as well as the Design Standards for Commercial, Industrial and Office -Institutional Developments contained in Chapter 20, Article =, Division 7, of the Chanhassen City Code. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. Ancillary uses may be permitted as listed below once a primary use has occupied the site. Shared parking may be used within the development. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 ,duly 19, 2005 Page 5 of 27 b. Permitted Uses The permitted uses in this zone shall be limited to light industrial, warehousing, and office as defined below. The uses shall be limited to those as defined herein. 1f there is a question as to whether or not a use meets the definition, the Community Development Director shall make that interpretation. Light Industrial - The manufacturing, compounding, processing, assembling, packaging, or testing of goods or equipment or research activities entirely within an enclosed structure. There shall be negligible impact upon the surrounding environment by noise, vibration, smoke, dust or pollutants. Conferences/Convention Center - establishments designed to accommodate people in assembly, providing conference and meeting services to individuals, groups, and organizations. Contractor yard - means any area or use of land where vehicles, equipment, and/or construction materials and supplies commonly used by building, excavation, roadway construction, landscaping and similar contractors are stored or serviced. A contractor's yard includes both areas of outdoor storage and areas confined within a completely enclosed buildings used in conjunction with a contractor's business. Must comply with the following standards: (1) Equipment and supply storage must be screened or enclosed. Screening shall comply with Buffer Yard D and F4 Fencing as specified in Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code. (2) Vehicles/Equipment shall be stored within an enclosed or screened area. (3) No unlicensed or inoperable vehicle/equipment shall be stored on premises. (4) All chemicals shall be stored in proper storage facilities, specified by OSHA regulations. (5) The contractor shall be licensed, bonded and insured. Day Care - establishments providing for the care and supervision of infants and children on a daily basis. The following applies to Day care centers: (1) The site shall have loading and drop off points designed to avoid interfering with traffic and pedestrian movements. (2) Outdoor play areas shall be located and designed in a manner which mitigates visual and noise impacts on adjoining residential areas. (3) Each center shall obtain all applicable state, county, and city licenses. Health Services- establishments primarily engaged in furnishing medical, surgical and other health services to persons. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 6 of 27 Office - Professional and business office. RecreationlHealth Club - establishments engaged in operating reducing and other health clubs, spas, and similar facilities featuring exercise and other physical fitness conditioning. Research Laboratory establishments engaged in scientific research or study. Must comply with the following standards: (1) All chemicals and pollutants and waste must be„ stored, used and disposed of according to OSHA and Hazmat regulations and standards. (2) The building must be secure from persons other than laboratory personnel. (3) No outdoor experiments that cause hazards or excessive noise or odors shall be permitted on site. Utility services Warehousing - Means the commercial storage of merchandise and personal property. Ancillary Uses (in conjunction with and integral to a primary use) Antennas Screened outdoor storage - Outside storage is permitted, if approved by the City Council as part of the site plan review, subject to being completely screened with 100 percent opaque fence and/or landscape screening. Showroom - showroom type display area for products stored or manufactured on -site provided that no more than 20 percent of the floor space is used for such display and sales. Telecommunication Towers by conditional use hermit only. Prohibited uses • Auto related including sales and repair • Churches • Garden Center Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 7 of 27 • Home furnishings and equipment stores • Home Improvement/Building Supply • Lumber Yard • Retail • Outdoor speakers or public address systems C. Setbacks The development is regulated by the PUD Standards. There are no minimum requirements for setbacks on interior lot lines in the PUD zone, except as specified below. The following setbacks shall apply: In the PUD standards, there is the requirement for landscape buffering in addition to building and parking setbacks. The following building and parking setbacks shall apply: Buffer yard, Setback building/parking (ft.) Gal in Blvd. C, 50,50 L an Blvd. C, 50, 50 Street A NA, 30, 10 Interior Lot Lines B, 0, 0 West Perimeter Lot Line (adjacent to industrial) C, 30,20 North Perimeter Lot Line (adjacent to residential): Buffer yard & setback D,100, 100 No fences shall be permitted between the required landscape buffer and arterial and collector roads. The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 70 percent for office and industrial uses. Any one site/lot can exceed the 70 percent requirement, but in no case may the entire finished development exceed 70 percent hard surface coverage. d. Development Standards Tabulation Box 1. Minimum Lot Dimensions a. Lot Area = one acre b. Frontage =150 feet; Minimum frontage on cul-de-sac = 60 feet c. Depth = 200 feet 2. Building Area Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 8 of 27 Building Square FootageBreakdown: Use Percent Total Square Feet Office 30% 105,000 Light Industrial /Warehouse 70% 245,000 Total (Maximum) 350,000 The actual use percentages and square footage totals may vary provided that the total building square footages are not exceeded. 3. More than one (1) principal structure may be placed on one (1) platted lot. 4. Building height shall be limited to 3 stories or 40 feet, except for Lot 5, Block 2 (lot 5) and Lot 3, Block 1(lot 6) which shall have a building height limit of 2 stories and 30 feet including parapet. e. Building (Materials and Design I. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. 2. All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Masonry or higher quality material shall be used. Color shall be introduced through colored block or panels and not painted cinder block. 3. Brick may be used and must be approved to assure uniformity. 4. Block shall have a weathered face or be polished, fluted, or broken face. 5. Concrete maybe poured in place, tilt -up or pre -cast, and shall be finished in stone, textured, coated, or painted. 6. Metal siding will not be approved except as support material to one of the above materials or curtain wall on office components or, as trim or as HVAC screen. 7. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with the primary structure. 8. All roof mounted equipment shall be screened from adjacent public right-of-ways and the project perimeter by walls of compatible appearing material or camouflaged to blend into the building or background. Wood screen fences are prohibited. All exterior process machinery, tanks, etc., are to be fully screened by compatible materials or landscaping. 9. The use of large unadorned, concrete panels and concrete block, or a solid wall unrelieved by architectural detailing, such as change in materials, change in color, fenestrations, or other significant visual relief provided in a manner or at intervals in keeping with the size, mass, and scale of the wall and its views from public ways shall be prohibited. Acceptable Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05=23 ,July 19, 2005 Page 9 of 27 materials will incorporate textured surfaces, exposed aggregate and/or other patterning. All walls shall be given added architectural interest through building design or appropriate landscaping. The buildings shall have varied and interesting detailing. 10. Space for trash and recycling shall be provided in the interior of all principal structures or within an enclosure for each lot developed in the Business Park. 11. Each building shall contain one or more pitched roof elements depending on scale and type of building, or other architectural treatments such as towers, arches, vaults, entryway projections, canopies and detailing to add additional interest and articulation to structures. 12. There shall be no underdeveloped sides of buildings visible from public right-of-ways. All elevations visible from the street shall receive nearly equal treatment and visual qualities. f. Site Landscaping and Screening 1. Landscaping along Lyman and Galpin Boulevards shall comply with buffer yard standard C. Landscaping along the northern project perimeter shall comply with buffer yard D. Landscaping along the westerly project perimeter shall comply with buffer yard B. All buffer yard plantings shall be installed as part of the subdivision. Each lot must present a landscape plan for approval with the site plan review process. 2. Storage of material outdoors is prohibited unless it has been approved under site plan review. All approved outdoor storage must be screened with berms, fences, walls and/or landscaping. 3. When parking lots are less than three feet above the adjacent roadway, an undulating or angular berm or elevation change of three feet or more in height shall be installed. All required boulevard landscaping shall be sodded. 4. Loading areas shall be screened 100 percent year round from public right-of-ways. Wing walls may be required. where deemed appropriate_ g. Signage I. The Chanhassen West Business Park PUD shall be permitted one project identification sign at the entrance on Galpin Boulevard. The sign shall not exceed eight feet in height. A maximum of 80 square feet of sign area shall be permitted. The project identification sign shall not be counted against the permitted signage on an individual parcel. 2. All freestanding parcel signs shall be limited to monument signs. The sign shall not exceed eighty (80) square feet in sign display area nor be greater than eight (8) feet in height. 3. Each property shall be allowed one monument sign per street frontage. 4. The signage will have consistency throughout the development. A common theme will be introduced at the development's entrance monument and will be used throughout. The sign Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 10 of 27 treatment is an element of the architecture and thus should reflect the quality of the development. The signs should be consistent in color, size, and material throughout the development. 5. Wall sign shall be permitted per city ordinance for industrial office park site. 6. All signs shall require a separate sign permit. 7. Lighted signs, which are illuminated either internally or externally, are prohibited. h. Lighting 1. Lighting for the interior of the business center should be consistent throughout the development. 2. A decorative, shoe box fixture (high pressure sodium. vapor lamps) with a square ornamental pole shall be used throughout the development area for area lighting. 3 Lighting equipment similar to what is mounted in the public street right-of-ways shall be used in the private areas. 4. All light fixtures shall be shielded. Light level for site lighting shall be no more than 112 candle at the property line. This does not apply to street lighting. 5. Site lighting shall be directed toward the interior of individual lots. i. Alternative Access 1: Each site shall accommodate transit service within the individual development, whenever possible. 2. Pedestrian access shall be provided from each site to the public sidewalk and trail system. 3. The developer and site users shall promote and encourage Traffic Demand Management Strategies. 4. Each site shall provide areas for bicycle parking and storage. 5. Preferential parking shall be provided for car and van pool vehicles within each site. SUBDIVISION REVIEW The applicant is proposing an eight -lot office -industrial development. LANDSCAPINGITREE PRESERVATION Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05 23 July 19, 2005 Page 11 of 27 Minimum requirements for landscaping include 9,082 sq. ft. of landscaped area around the parking lot, 36 trees for the parking lot, and bufferyard plantings along all property lines. The applicant's proposed as compared to the requirements for landscape area and parking lot trees is shown in the following table. Required Proposed North Prop. line 36 canopy trees 50 canopy bufferyard D -- 25' width x 72 understory trees 120 understory 1200' length 108 shrubs 180 shrubs 75% of totals shown South property line 30 canopy trees 21 canopy trees bufferyard C -- 20' x 1000' 60 understory trees 40 understory trees 90 shrubs 60 shrubs East property line 37 canopy trees 22 canopy trees + 16 existing bufferyard C — 20' x 1240' trees 74 understory trees 57 understory trees 111 shrubs 42 shrubs West property line 11 canopy trees 17 canopy trees bufferyard B —15' x 720' 17 understory trees 35 understory trees 75% of totals shown 27 shrubs 53 shrubs The applicant does not meet minimum requirements for the buffer yards along the south and east property lines. Staff recommends that bufferyard plantings be increased in these areas to meet minimum requirements. The applicant has saved a large portion of the existing, mature oaks on site. This preservation will add a unique feel to the site and proved the residential neighborhood to the north an added buffer for the development. The applicant did an excellent job fitting the design to the site. GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL The existing site is about 40.15 acres in size with scattered wetlands. In addition, there are three existing buildings on the property which will have to be razed prior to any grading operations. The current plans show buildings with proposed floor elevations from 961-966. The applicant is now proposing to grade about 83% of the site for the new building pads, storm pond and a proposed street ending with a cul-de-sac. The current plans propose eight lots located along the proposed street and cul-de-sac. There are a few areas of concern with the grading plan. Staff would like to see the applicant do a better job of matching in with the existing topography of the site and maintain a side slope of 3:1 maximum. The existing site drains toward the existing three wetlands on the northwesterly and southwesterly corners and east side of the parcel. At these elevations, stormwater from the buildings and parking lots will drain toward the proposed catch basins and be conveyed via storm sewer system to the proposed storm pond on the southwesterly corner of the parcel. The pond will treat the water before discharging it to the adjacent wetland. All of the ponds are required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. The applicant is required to meet the existing site runoff rates for the 10-year and 100-year, 24-hour storm events. Storm Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 12 of 27 sewer sizing calculations must be submitted at the time of final plat application. The storm sewer must, be sized. for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility easements must be dedicated on the final plat over the public storm drainage system including ponds, drainage swales, and wetlands up to the I00-year flood level. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. The applicant must be aware that a retaining wall structure is not allowed within the public street right-of-way. Also, any retaining wall exceeding four feet in height must be designed by a registered structural engineer, with approved safety fence and a building permit must be obtained. Erosion control measures and site restoration must be developed in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. (BWH). Staff recommends that the City's Type II erosion control fence, which is a heavy duty silt fence, be used for the area adjacent to the existing wetlands on the north and south grading limits of the site. Type I silt fence shall be used in all other areas. A minimum 75-foot long rock construction entrance must be shown at the entrance drive that will be utilized during construction. In addition, tree preservation fencing must be installed at the limits of tree removal. Erosion control blankets are recommended for all of the steep 3:1 slopes with an elevation change of eight feet or more. All disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. The applicant should be aware that any off -site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required. to supply the City with detailed haul routes. A minimum 75-foot rock construction entrance must be added to the plans at the proposed access off of Galpin Boulevard. Storm Water Management The proposed development is required to maintain existing runoff rates and meet NURP standards. Storm water calculations should be submitted to ensure the proposed storm water pond is sized adequately for the proposed development. Easements Drainage and utility easements a minimum of 20 feet in width should be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used as PVC and storm water ponds. Erosion Control Stable emergency overflows are needed for the proposed pond on site. The emergency overflows should be clearly labeled on the plan and a detail is needed. The emergency overflows can be stabilized with a turf re -enforcement mat or fabric and riprap. Notes on the plan are needed describing tinting of temporary stabilization with Type 1 mulch and seed or erosion control blanket and seed. Timing of stabilization will vary depending upon slope Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 13 of 27 and if it is a concentrated flow area. The rate of mulch application is needed as well (2 tons per acre, disc anchored). All riprap/fabric at the flared end section must be installed within 24 hours of flared end section installation. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of Slope Time Steeper than 3:1 7 days 10:1 to 3:1 14 days Flatter than 10:1 21 days (Maximum time an area can remain open when the area is not actively being worked.) These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water. Erosion control blanket should be specified in the swale from the flared end section to the wetland along the west boundary of the site. The blanket specified should adequately protect the area from designed velocity and depth of flow. The blanket and seed in the swale should be installed within 5 days of culvert installation. Erosion control blanket is recommended for the pond slopes from around 952 to 942 contours. All blanket on the plan should be shown as a shaded area. Sediment Control Temporary sediment basins are needed prior to disturbing upslope areas. The areas of temporary sediment basins should be labeled on the plan. A temporary outlet (e.g., a perforated riser and rock cone) is needed for the pond; details should be provided. Temporary basins are needed in the area of the proposed permanent storm water pond, the southeast corner of the site prior to discharging to the culvert under Galpin Boulevard, and possibly in the northwest area of the site to handle water runon from the north prior to discharge to the wetland. The Wimco inlet control detail proposed will work for all curbside inlets. Any and all area inlets or drop inlets in paved areas will need alternate controls/Wimco details. The engineer should check on alternate designs for Wimco-type inlet controls to fit the various types of inlets. Additional inlet controls may be needed for adjacent inlets on Galpin Boulevard and Street A. Silt fence will be needed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond the wetland. Type 1 and Type 2 silt fence locations need to be specified on the plan. Type 2 silt fence should be installed around all wetland areas and in the southeast corner of the site to protect the culvert Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 14 of 27 under Galpin Boulevard. The silt fence should be extended along the south side to close the gap in the silt fence. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as needed. Surface Water Management Fees Water Quality Fees Because of the impervious surface associated with this development, the water quality fees for this proposed development are based on industrial development rates of $6,330/acre. Based on the proposed developed area of approximately 33.87 acres, the water quality fees associated with this project are $214,397. Water Quantity Fees The SWMP has established a connection charge for the different land uses based on an average citywide rate for the installation of water quantity systems. This cost includes land acquisition, proposed SWMP culverts, open channels, and storm water ponding areas for runoff storage. Industrial developments have a connection charge of $5,957 per developable acre. This results in a water quantity fee of approximately $201,764 for the proposed development. SWMP Credits This project proposes the construction of one NURP pond. The applicant will be credited for water quality where NURP basins are provided to treat runoff. This will be determined upon review of the ponding and storm sewer calculations. Credits may also be applied to the applicant's SWMP fees for the provision of outlet structures. The applicant will not be assessed for areas that are dedicated outlots. No credit will be given for temporary pond areas. At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $413,661. Other Agencies The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase 11 construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval. UTILITIES Municipal sewer and water stubs are available to the site from Galpin Boulevard on the east side of the parcel. The applicant is proposing to connect to the existing utility stubs and extend them to the proposed lots to service the site. The sanitary and watermain lines that. run within the Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 15 of 27 public street right-of-way and within the shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5 until the last sanitary manhole will be considered a public utility line and the remaining will be considered private utility. Additional gate valves are needed for the shared private watermain between any two lots. Minimum 20-foot wide easements will be required over the public portion of the storm sewer lines between Lots 2 and 3. The underlying property has been previously assessed for sewer, water and street improvements and there is no remaining assessment due payable to the City. Since the developer will be responsible for extending lateral sewer and water service to the lots, the sanitary sewer and water connection charges will be waived. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. All of the utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Upon completion of the utility improvements, the utilities will be turned over to the City for maintenance and ownership. The applicant is also required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will have to be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. STREETS There is one public street proposed with the project. The street is proposed as a cul-de-sac running west of Galpin Boulevard and a private shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5. The applicant is proposing the paved streets to be 32-feet wide with a 60-foot wide right-of-way and a 46-foot cul-de-sac paved radius. The applicant must be aware that the City's standard commercial street pavement width is 36-foot wide from back -of -curb to back -of -curb and the cul-de-sac must be 48-foot in radius. Staff is fine with the 24-foot wide shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5. The developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 7-ton design. The proposed development lies west of Galpin Boulevard (CSAH 19) and north of Lyman Boulevard (CSAH 18), A -Minor Expander Arterials as identified on SRF Consulting Group Incorporated's Functional Classification Map. Proposed access to the site will be from Galpin Boulevard, which aligns with Stone Creek Drive, an existing local street extending east of Galpin Boulevard. Staff has researched the feasibility to move the proposed site access from Galpin Boulevard to Lyman. Boulevard in response to citizens' requests. Due to wetland conditions, access to Lyman Boulevard would be 1,000 feet west of Galpin Boulevard. Carver County has identified Lyman Boulevard as a regional east -west collector with limited access; therefore, Staff recommends that the access to Chanhassen West Business Park remain at the Galpin Boulevard/Stone Creek Drive intersection. This recommendation is also consistent with Section 18-57 of the City Code, which states that "access to arterial streets shall be at Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 16 of 27 intervals of not less than one-fourth mile [1,320 feet] and through existing and established crossroads". SRF Consulting Group, Inc. analyzed the 2020 transportation system in conjunction with the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan. SRF's forecasted 2020 traffic volume for Galpin Boulevard was based on the 2020 Land Use Map and the construction of the new Trunk Highway 212. The proposed land use of the Chanhassen West Business Park is consistent with the 2020 land use used in SRF's traffic analysis. SRF's report does not identify a need to upgrade Galpin Boulevard by the year 2020. Right turn lanes for north and southbound traffic exist at the Galpin Boulevard intersection with Stone Creek Road and the proposed site access. The developer must submit an access permit to Carver County Public Works for the proposed connection to Galpin Boulevard. As stipulated by the Assistant County Engineer, the developer must submit information on proposed turn lanes with the permit application. Staff has concerns of movements of truck traffic accessing off Galpin Boulevard to Lots 1 and 8 being too close. Staff recommends increasing the access width to 44 feet to create a three -lane access off Galpin Boulevard and increase the turning curb radius. Also, relocate Lots 1 and 8 easterly accesses further to the west and re -align them opposite of each other. The applicant should be aware that, in commercial districts, six-foot wide sidewalks are required and the parking driveway aisle must be 26-feet wide. Cross -access easements will be obtained for the shared driveways and recorded against the lots. PARKS AND RECREATION PARKS The proposed Chanhassen West Business Park is situated within the park service areas of Stone Creek Park and the Chanhassen Nature Preserve. Stone Creek Park is a seven -acre neighborhood park located across Galpin Boulevard. Amenities at the park include a sliding hill, basketball court, playground, benches and trails. The Chanhassen Nature Preserve is a 100-acre natural area featuring both wetland and upland areas and a comprehensive pedestrian trial system. TRAILS An existing section of the city's Comprehensive Trail Plan parallels the eastern border of the subject property. Future plans call for a pedestrian trail on the north side of Lyman Boulevard. Care should be taken to protect sufficient right-of-way for this future improvement. MISCELLANEOUS As part of the future development of the site, the applicant should be aware of the following: Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 17 of 27 Each site will require a separate site plan review. Drive aisle widths are 26 feet wide, not 24. The buildings are required to have an automatic fire extinguishing system. The plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. The location of property lines will have an impact on the code requirements for the proposed buildings, including but not limited to; allowable size and fire -resistive construction. The plans as submitted do not have the information necessary to determine compliance at this time. The owner and or their representative shall meet with the Inspections Division as soon as possible to discuss property line issues as well as plan review and permit procedures. WETLANDS Existing Wetlands Eight Ag/Urban wetlands exist on -site and were delineated by Earth Science Associates, Inc. in October 2004. The wetlands on -site are generally highly disturbed and/or incidental as a result of the site being used historically as agricultural land and a contractor's yard. Basin F 1-30 (Wetland B) is a Type 2/3 wetland located in a farm field in the eastern portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass, smartweed and cattail. The hydrology of the wetland is affected by drain tile. The applicant is proposing to fill the wetland. The total proposed.impact to Basin F 1-30 is 19,166 square feet (0.44 acres). Basin F 31-34 was included in the delineation, but has been found to be non -wetland. A no loss determination should be completed for Basin F 31-34. Basin F 35-50 is a Type 2 wetland located in the northwest corner of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass, stinging nettle and black willow. No impact is proposed to Basin F 35-50. Basin F 51-80 N is a Type 2 wetland located in the southwestern portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by.reed canary grass, stinging nettle and black and sandbar willow. The applicant is proposing to fill this wetland; however, it is an incidental wetland and is therefore exempt under MR 8420.0122 Subp. 5C. An exemption request should be completed for Basin F 51-80 N. Basin F 51-80 S is a Type 4 wetland located in the southwestern portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by cattail. No impact is proposed to Basin F 51-80 S. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 18 of 27 Basin F 81-86 (Wetland D) is a Type 2 wetland located in the south central portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass. The applicant is proposing to fill this wetland. The total proposed impact to Basin F 81-86 is 3,920 square feet (0.09 acres). Basin F 87-90 (Wetland C) is a Type 2 wetland located in the south central portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass. The applicant is proposing to fill this wetland. The total proposed impact to Basin F 87-90 is 2,178 square feet (0.05 acres). Basin F 91-97 is a Type 2 wetland located in the south central portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass. The applicant is proposing to fill this wetland; however, it is an incidental wetland and is therefore exempt under MR 8420.0122 Subp. 5C. An exemption request should be completed for Basin F 91-97. On December 30, 2004, City staff conducted an on -site review of the wetland delineation. The wetland boundaries shown on the plans are consistent with staff recommendation. Another wetland basin (Wetland A) is shown on the plans. This area was not identified in conjunction with the Earth Science Associates delineation. Upon review of the soil survey, National Wetland Inventory, aerial photography of the area and an on-site.investigation of the basin on July 8, 2005, it has been determined that the wetland is incidental and is therefore exempt under MR 8420.0122 Subp. 5C. An exemption request should be completed for Wetland A. Wetland Replacement Wetland replacement must occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR. 8420). A Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for Water/Wetland Projects (Parts I and I1) should be submitted for the proposed project. The application should include sequencing discussions and sequencing flexibility requests, if applicable. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacementplan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. ::A five-year wetland replacement monitoring plan should be submitted. The replacement monitoring plan should include a detailed management plan for invasive non-native species, particularly purple loosestrife and reed canary grass. The plans should show fixed photo monitoring points for the replacement wetland. The applicant should provide proof of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland. Several corrections must bemade to the Wetland. Mitigation Plan (sheet 10 of 13): 1. Wetland A is shown as an impact area. Upon finalization of exemption paperwork, mitigation will not be required for this wetland; 2. Wetland C (Basin F 87-90) is 0.05 acres in area; and 3. Wetland D (Basin F 81-86) is 0.09 acres in area. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 19 of 27 A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) must be maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas should be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant must install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) should maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. The applicant must submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit should be effective for no less than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant should submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. COMPLIANCE TABLE Area (sq. ft.) Frontage (ft.) Depth (ft.) Notes Code 43,560 150 200 Lot 1 166,233 328 354 Lot 2 144,036 238 354 Lot 3 124,349 329 350 Wetland setback Lot 4 219,215 35 # 380 Wetland setback Lot 5 156,190 75 @ 404 Wetland setback Lot 6 257,813 80 @ 460 North buffer yard Lot 7 82,385 205 366 Lot 8 97,843 328 368 Outlot A 180,643 Ponding and wetland mitigation Outlot B 92,577 Wetland Outlot C 165,365 Preserved woodlands ROW 62,069 1.42 acres Total 1,748,718 40.15 acres #.Lot must be revised to meet the minimum 60 feet frontage on cul-de-sac. @ Exceeds the 60 feet frontage on cul-de-sac. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that City Council adopt the following three motions and adoption of the attached findings of fact and recommendation: A. "The Chanhassen City Council approves the ordinance rezoning of the property located within the Chanhassen West Business Park from Agricultural Estate District (A-2) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) incorporating the development design standards contained within this staff report based on the findings of fact attached to the report." Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 20 of 27 B. "The Chanhassen City Council approves the Preliminary Plat for Chanhassen West Business Park, plans prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc., dated June 17, 2005, based on the findings of fact attached to the report and subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant shall increase landscape plantings in the south and east property line bufferyards to meet minimum requirements. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted before final approval. 2. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to any construction activities. Fencing shall remain in place until construction is completed. 3. All trees shown as preserved on plans dated 6/17/05 shall be protected. Any trees damaged or removed shall be replaced at a rate of 2:1 diameter inches. 4. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). A Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for Water/Wetland Projects (Parts I and 11) shall be submitted for the proposed project. The application shall include sequencing discussions and sequencing flexibility requests, if applicable. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent. with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. 5. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. 6. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. Y 7. The proposed development shall maintain existing runoff rates and meet NURP standards. Storm water calculations shall be submitted to ensure the proposed storm water pond is sized adequately for the proposed development. 8. Stable emergency overflows shall be provided for the proposed pond on site. The emergency overflows shall be clearly labeled on the plan and a detail is needed. The emergency overflows may be stabilized with a turf re -enforcement mat or fabric and riprap. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 21 of 27 9. Notes on the plan describing timing of temporary stabilization with Type 1 mulch and seed or erosion control blanket and seed shall be included. The notes shall include timing of stabilization as well as the rate of mulch application (2 tons per acre, disc anchored). 10. All riprap/fabric at the flared end section shall be installed within 24 hours of flared end section installation. 11. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the .following table of slopes and time frames: T e of Sloe Time (Maximum time an area can Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area 10:1 to 3:1 14 days is not actively being worked.) Flatter than 10:1 21 days These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water. 12. Erosion control blanket shall be specified in the swale from the flared end section to the wetland along the west boundary of the site. The blanket specified shall adequately protect the area from designed velocity and depth of flow. The blanket and seed in the swale shall be installed within 5 days of culvert installation. Erosion control blanket is recommended for the pond slopes from around 952 to 942 contours. All blanket on the plan shall be shown as a shaded area. 13. Temporary sediment basins shall be installed prior to disturbing upslope areas. The areas of temporary sediment basins shall be labeled on the plan. A temporary outlet (e.g., a perforated riser and rock cone) shall be provided for the pond; details should be provided. Temporary basins shall be constructed in the area of the proposed permanent storm water pond, the southeast corner of the site prior to discharging to the culvert under Galpin Boulevard, and possibly in the northwest area of the site to handle water runon from the north prior to discharge to the wetland. 14. Any and all area inlets or drop inlets in paved areas shall be protected with alternate controlslWimco details. The engineer shall research and provide alternate designs for Wimco-type inlet controls to fit the various types of inlets. 15. Additional inlet controls shall be provided for adjacent inlets on Galpin Boulevard and Street A. 16. Silt fence shall be installed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond the wetland. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 22 of 27 17. Type 1 and Type 2 silt fence locations shall be specified on the plan. Type 2 silt fence shall be installed around all wetland areas and in the southeast corner of the site to protect the culvert under Galpin Boulevard. The silt fence shall be extended along the south side to close the gap in the silt fence. 18. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. 19. The estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $413,661. 20. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase H construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval. 21. In lieu of parkland dedication and trail construction, full park fees shall be collected at the rate in force at the time of final plat for the proposed Chanhassen West Business Park. At current rates, the park fee would total $359,500 (35.95 x $10,000 per acre). 22. A demolition permit must be obtained before beginning demolition of any existing structures. 23. Retaining walls over four high must be designed by a professional engineer and a permit must be obtained prior to construction. 24. 'Provide a water service for Lot. 6. 25. A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. 26. Fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for fire protection is required to be installed. Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction except when approved alternate methods of protection are provided. 27. The new proposed street will be required to have a street name. Submit proposed street name to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen'Fim Marshal for review and approval. 28. No burning permits will be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. 29. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed load of fire apparatus and shall be surfaced so as to provide all weather driving capabilities. Pursuant to Minnesota Fire code Section 503.2.3. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 23 of 27 30. Temporary street signs shall be installed on street intersections when construction of a new roadway allows passage be vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota fire code Section 501.4. 31. Prior to final platting, storm sewer design data will need to be submitted for staff review. Depending on the size of the drainage area, additional catch basins may be required at that time. The storm sewer will have to be designed for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility easements will need to be dedicated on the final plat over the public storm drainage system including storm water ponds, drainage swales, emergency overflows, access routes for maintenance, over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, and buffer areas used as PVC. The minimum easement width shall be 20 feet wide. 32. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. 33. Private utility easements are required for the sanitary sewer and water lines that serve Lot 4 but go through Lot 5. 34. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. 35.On the site plan: a. Revise the cul-de-sac pavement radius to 48 feet. b. Revise the parking driveway aisle from 24 feet to 26 feet wide. c. Revise the public street width from 32 feet to 36 feet wide. d. Increase the full access width off Galpin Boulevard to 44 feet and create three lane access. e. Shift Lots 1 and 8 easterly access further toward the west and realign the across each other. f. Show at least one, 6-foot. wide, side walk along the public street. g. Show the access off Galpin Boulevard turning curb radius. h. Realign lot 5 access perpendicular to the shared driveway. i. Show street lights. j. Show handicap parks and ramps. 36.On the grading plan: a. Extend silt fence type between the storm pond and Outlot A. Silt fence Type II must be used adjacent to wetlands and storm pond. b. Revise contour lines to match 3:1 maximum slope and tic the proposed contour lines with the existing contours for Lots 4, 5, south of Lot 2 and northeast of Lot I. c. Show the proposed contour lines for Lot 6. d. Show all retaining walls top and bottom elevations. e. Show all emergency overflows (EOF). The EOF must be 1.5' lower than the adjacent lowest floor. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July I9, 2005 Page 24 of 27 L Revise Lot 6 parking slope to 0.7% minimum. g. Add a note to remove any existing structure and access off Galpin Boulevard and all disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. h. Show 75-foot minimum construction rock entrance. i. No retaining walls structure is allowed within public street and/or public utility easements, revise accordingly. j. Show 20-foot utility easement for the storm sewer between Lots 2 and 3 37.On the utility plans: a. Show all existing and proposed drainage and utility easements. b. Show the proposed sanitary and storm sewer stubs inverts. c. Add storm sewer schedule. d. Public storm sewer pipe type must be RCP and 15-inch minimum diameter. e. The last street accessible storm manhole (STMH#2) must be built with a sump. f. Revise sanitary sewer pipe from DIP to PVC-C900. g. On the utility profile show all sewer and pipe crossings. h. Minimum vertical separation must be 18 inches between watermain and sewer. i. Call out watermain fittings 38. Any retaining wall over four feet in height must be designed by a registered Civil Engineer in the state of Minnesota with an approved safety fence on top of it. Also, it will require a building permit from the Building Department. 39. Add the following City of Chanhassen Detail Plate Nos. 1002, 2109, 2110 2204, 3104, 3109, 5201, 5205, 5214 and 5215. 40. Prior to final plat approval, a professional civil engineer registered in the state of Minnesota must sign all plans. 41. All of the ponds are required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program .(NURP) standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. 42. Cross -access easements for the shared driveway accesses must be obtained and recorded against the lots for each of the entrance drives. 43. Any off -site grading will require easements from the appropriate property owner. 44. Public utility improvements will be required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required at the time of final platting. The applicant will also be required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. The applicant must be aware that all public utility improvements will require a preconstruction meeting before building permit issuance. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be obtained, including but Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 25 of 27 not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. 45. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes and traffic control plans. The applicant should be aware that any off -site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. 46. All private streets are required to have 24-foot wide paved streets from back -of -curb to back - of -curb, be built to a 7-ton design and contained within a 40-foot wide private.easement. At the completion of the project, the developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 7-ton design. 47. Six-foot wide sidewalks are required. 48. All plans must be signed by a Fagistefed efilaineam in the malmeof duplicates condition 40) 49. All of the proposed building pads must have a rear yard elevation at least three feet above the HWL of the adjacent ponds. 50. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's Building Department. 51. Comply with Carver County memo dated June 28, 2005 and revise the plans accordingly. 52. Revise plan sheet size to 24 x 36 using scale 50. 53. The developer shall a dedicate Outlot C to the City for open space purposes of and dedicate a conservation easement over Outlot C. 54. The applicant shall work with staff to resolve any drainage issues with Lot 2 in Trotters Ridge and Lots 5, 6 and Outlot C of the development:' C. "The Chanhassen City Council approves Planning, the Wetland Alteration Permit to fill and alter wetlands within the development, plans prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc., dated June 17, 2005, subject to the following conditions: L A no loss determination shall be completed for Basin F 31-34. 2. Exemption requests shall be completed for Basins F 51-80 N. Basin F 91-97 and Wetland A. 3. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). A Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for Water/Wetland Projects (Parts I and ED shall be submitted for the proposed project. The Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 26 of 27 application shall include sequencing discussions and sequencing flexibility requests, if applicable. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. 4. A five-year wetland replacement monitoring plan shall be submitted. The replacement monitoring plan shall include a detailed management plan for invasive non-native species, particularly purple loosestrife and reed canary grass. The plans shall show fixed photo monitoring points for the replacement wetland. The applicant shall provide proof of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland. 5. Several corrections must be made to the Wetland Mitigation Plan (sheet 10 of 13): a. Wetland A is shown as an impact area. Upon finalization of exemption paperwork, mitigation will not be required for this wetland; b. Wetland C (Basin F 87-90) is 0.05 acres in area; and c. Wetland D (Basin F 81-86) is 0.09 acres in area. 6. A wetland buffer .16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. 7. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 1.10010 of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. 8. Drainage and utility easements a minimum of 20 feet in width shall be provided overall existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used as PVC and storm water ponds. 9. Silt fence shall be installed around 4utlot A along the east side between the pond the wetland. 10. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase II construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval" ATTACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact. 2. Development Review Application. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 27 of 27 3. Reduced Copy Existing Conditions. 4. Reduced Copy Preliminary Plat. 5. Reduced Copy Preliminary Site Plan. 6. Reduced Copy Wetland Mitigation Plan. 7. Reduced Copy Concept Landscape Plan. 8. Memo from Bill Weckman (Carver County) to Robert Generous dated 6/28/05. 9. Letter from Pete May (Sprint) to Robert Generous dated 6/23/05. 10. Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Mailing. &Aplan12005 planning cases105.23 chanhassea west business parMstaff report preliminary pud.doc w CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION IN RE: Application of Eden Trace Corp. for a Rezoning of property from A2, Agricultural Estate District, to.PUD, Planned Unit Development for an Office -Industrial Park, Subdivision approval for eight lots, three outlots and associated right-of-way, and a Wetland Alteration permit to fill and grade wetlands on site — Chanhassen West Business Park. On July 19, 2005, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application of Eden Trace Corp. for rezoning, preliminary plat approval and wetland alteration permit for the referenced property. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed development preceded by published. and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned A2, Agricultural Estate District. 2. The property is guided in the Land Use Plan for Office/Industrial use. 3. The legal description of the property is: (see Exhibit A) 4. The Subdivision Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider seven possible adverse affects of the proposed subdivision. The seven (7) affects and our findings .regarding them are: a. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance; b. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and regional plans including but not limited to the city's comprehensive plan; c. The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and storm water drainage are suitable for the proposed development; d. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage, sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by this chapter; e. The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage; f: Tlie proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record; and g. The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the following exists: 1. Lack of adequate storm water drainage. 2. Lack of adequate roads. 3. Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems. 4. Lack of adequate off -site public improvements or support systems. 5. The Zoning Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider six (6) possible adverse affects of the proposed amendment. The six (6) affects and our findings regarding them are a. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found consistent with the official City Comprehensive Plan. b. The proposed use is compatible with the present and future land uses of the area. c. The proposed use conforms with all performance standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance. d. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. e. The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the city's service capacity. f. Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the property. 6. The planning report H05-23 dated July 19, 2005, prepared by Robert Generous, et at, is incorporated herein. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the preliminary Planned Unit Development, Preliminary Plat and Wetland Alteration permit. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 19'h day of July, 2005. CHANHASSEN PLANNING CONMSSION BY: Its Chairman &ApFa \M5 planning cases\05.23 Chanhassen west business parkllindings of fact cban w business park.doc 2 EXHI9IT A DESCRIPTION; That part of the last Half (£ 1/2) of the SotAheast Quarter (SE 1%}. Section 16, Township 116 North, Range 23 Wit, Which tties South of the North 1065.41 feet, westerly of the center ine of County State Aid Highway No. 19, and North c f the South 100.OD feet;• ALSO e Thot pertof the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 16. Township 116 North, Range 23 West. Eying weswy of the centerline of County State Aid Highway No.. 19 and northerly „of the centerline of . County State Ald Highway No. 18_ said properly hein9• subject to easement for roadrroy putpos for County State Aid Nighwgy 19 and County State Aid l"tighway.l8. • Y • Y r • Y r CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, NIINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. ----- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE CHANHASSEN CFTY CODE, THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, BY REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY THE C1TY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS: Section 1. Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code, the City's zoning ordinance, is hereby amended by rezoning all property within the Chanhassen West Business Park from A2, Agricultural Estate District, to PUD, Planned Unit Development (Office/industrial) District. Section 2. The rezoning of this property .incorporates the design standards contained in the Planning Commission staff report dated July 19, 2005, as amended. Section 3. The zoning map of the City of Chanhassen shall not be republished to show the aforesaid zoning, but the Clerk shall appropriately mark the zoning map on file in the Clerk's Office for the purpose of indicating the rezoning hereinabove provided for in this ordinance, and all of the notations, references, and other information shown thereon are hereby incorporated by reference and made a part of this ordinance. Section 4. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this day of . 2005. ATTEST: Todd Gerhardt, Clerk/M[anager Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on 92005.) uu r . ..S - LJLJ 10 1 f Li It Der N01140b' 08IHI >18Vd 8098V !\ �, l i • � T • NEWDOC l 1 i E.-( Z 1r CITY OF CHANHASSEN STAFF REPORT PC DATE: July 19, 2005 CC DATE: Aug. 8, 2005 REVIEW DEADLINE: August 16, 2005 CASE #: 05-23 6W BY: RG, LH, ML, AM, JS, ST PROPOSAL: Request for Rezoning of property from Agricultural Estate District (A-2) to Planned Unit Development (PUD), Preliminary PIat Approval, and Wetland Alteration Permit — Chanhassen West Business Park. LOCATION: APPLICANT: The northwest corner of the intersection of Lyman Boulevard and Galpin Boulevard Eden Trace Corporation 8156 Mallory Court Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 361-0722 Volk Minger Partnership P. O. Box 236 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 470-1753 PRESENT ZONING: Agricultural Estate District, A2 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Office/Industrial ACREAGE: 40.15 acres DENSITY: F.A.R. 0.IS — 0.33 SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant in proposing an Office -Industrial Planned Unit development consisting of eight lots and three outlots with a wetland alteration permit to fill and alter wetlands within the development. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION -MAKING: The City has a relatively high level of discretion in approving rezonings, PUD's, and amendments to PUD's because the City is acting in its legislative or policy making capacity. A rezoning or PUD, and amendment thereto, must be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The City's discretion in approving or denying a preliminary plat is limited to whether or not the proposed plat meets the standards outlined in the Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Ordinance. If it meets these standards, the City must approve the preliminary plat. This is a quasi judicial decision. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 2 of 26 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant is proposing an office -industrial Planned Unit Development. The development consists of eight lots, three outlots and public right -of way. The developer proposes creation of a common open space to preserve wooded areas within the development. Access is proposed at the existing driveway entrance off Galpin Boulevard. Ponding for the development is proposed in the southwest comer of the project. Water and sewer service are available to the site. The purpose of this development is to create a PUD light industrialloffice park. The use of the PUD zone is to allow for more flexible development while creating a higher quality and more sensitive proposal. The standards are partially based on the uses within the Industrial Office Park District (IOP), but provide additional requirements not included in the IOP district. The PUD design standards will be incorporated in an ordinance which will regulate the development of the site. The property to the north is a residential single-family subdivision, Trotters Ridge, which is zoned Planned Unit Development -Residential. The property to the east, across Galpin Boulevard, is a residential single-family subdivision, Stone Creek, which is zoned Single -Family Residential. The property to the south, across Lyman Boulevard, contains the Holasek nursery, which is currently zoned Agricultural Estate District and is guided for Office/Industrial use. Both Galpin. Boulevard and Lyman Boulevard are classified as minor arterial roadways in the City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan. Minor arterial roadways are intended and designed to carry higher traffic volumes. As the city continues to grow, Galpin Boulevard will provide mobility for north -south traffic flow to destinations within the city as well as the regional transportation system. The property has abandoned farming uses on the northern and eastern portions of the site; abandoned mining and excavating operation on the western and southwest portions of the property; and landscaping and contracting operations are located on the central portion of the property. A house is located in the southeast corner of the property. Three large wetland areas are located in the east central, northwest, and southwest of the property. The site is significantly wooded in the north central area. The property has a high point of approximately .980 feet in the north central area and a low point of 940 feet in the southwest corner of the property. The property is bounded by Galpin and Lyman Boulevards. Staff is recommending that the preliminary Planned Unit Development, preliminary plat and wetland alteration permit be approved. BACKGROUND On August 12,1996, City Council denied a Land Use Map Amendment #96-1b from Office/Industrial to Residential Medium Density for the northerly 22.6 acres, conceptual and preliminary approval of PUD #96-2, preliminary plat approval for 23 lots and associated right- of-way, Site Plan Review #96-5 approval for 140 townhouse units, and Wetland Alteration Permit #95-2b. In the summer of 1995, Scherber Partnership Properties requested a land use map amendment from Office/industrial to Residential - Low Density, a rezoning to Single Family Residential, Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 3 of 26 RSF, and preliminary plat approval to permit 59 single-family lots. City staff recommended denial of the land use map amendment and consequently the rezoning and subdivision. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend denial of the development, and the City Council tabled the item, with the consent of the applicant, to permit staff and the applicant to work out a compromise for the development of the parcel. However, in February, 1996, the applicant formally withdrew the development application. On February '13, 1987, City Council approved CUP #87-1 for a landscape contractors yard and a wholesale nursery and a variance to permit a contractor's yard within one mile of an existing contractor's yard (on the same property). On November 19, 1984, the City Council approved a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), #84-13, to permit a contractor's yard for R & W Sanitation on the southeasterly 32 acres of the site. Such approval included the storage and repair of garbage trucks. The property was zoned R-1A, Agricultural Residence District. On November 19, 1984, the City Council also approved CUP #84-14 for a contractors yard to include the storage and repair of construction equipment. In April, 1982, the property owner, Volk, applied for a building permit. to reconstruct a pole barn which had collapsed due to heavy snow. The building permit was denied because the storage and repair of excavating equipment in the pole barn was not a permitted use in the R-1A district at that time. Mr. Volk petitioned the Council on May.17, 1982 to issue the building permit. The City Council approved the issuance of the building permit subject to Mr. Volk applying for a rezoning request from R-1A to 1-1. Mr. Volk. made an application for the rezoning and a comprehensive land use plan amendment. On June 25, 1982, the Planning Commission recommended denial of the request. The City Council considered the request on October 4, 1982. The Council tabled the item until staff completed a survey of all contractors' yards as well as other non -conforming uses in the city. The City Council amended the Zoning Ordinance to allow contractor's yards as CUPs in the R-IA zone on August 20, 1984. On November .12, 1980, a rezoning request from R-IA to I -I on the parcel was considered by the .Planning Commission. At that meeting, the request was revised to an ordinance amendment to permit contractors' businesses and storage yards as conditional uses in the R-IA district. The Planning Commission recommended denial of the request. The City Council subsequently denied the request on January 5, 1981. REZONING Justification for Rezoning to PUD The applicant is requesting to rezone approximately 45 acres from A2, Agricultural Estate District, to PUD, Planned Unit Development for an Office/Industrial Park. The project consists of eight lots. This property was one of four areas designated for Office/Industrial use as part of the 1991 comprehensive plan update. The review criteria are taken from the intent section of the PUD Ordinance. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2065 Page 4 of 26 Section 20-501. Intent Planned unit developments offer enhanced flexibility to develop a site through the relaxation of most normal zoning district standards. The use of the PUD in this instance is to permit impervious surface clustering within the development in order to preserve a significant area of trees. The use of the PUD zoning also allows for an internal transfer of site coverage. Ih exchange for this enhanced flexibility, the City has the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the other more standard zoning districts. The proposed development provides a compatible development with the surrounding development subject to the recommended modifications to the plan. The proposed and rezoning assist in the furtherance of the following land use goals of the City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan: Recognizing that some uses pay their own way in terms of the property taxes generated and. some uses do not, Chanhassen will strive for a mixture of development which will assure it financial future. Development will be encouraged within the NWSA line. Planned industrial development will be encouraged as a means of encouraging tax base growth and creating new employment opportunities. Development should be phased in accordance with the ability of the city to provide services. Development shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use PIan. DEVE LOPME, NT DESIGN STANDARDS Staff is proposing the following development standards govern the development of the property. Development Standards a. Intent The purpose of this zone is to create a PUD light industrial/office park. The use of the PUD zone is to allow for more flexible design standards while creating a higher quality and more sensitive proposal. All utilities are required to be placed underground. Each lot proposed for development shall proceed through site plan review based on the development standards outlined below as well as the Design Standards for Commercial, Industrial and Office -Institutional Developments contained in Chapter 20, Article XXIII, Division 7, of the Chanhassen City Code. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. Ancillary uses may be permitted as listed below once a primary use has occupied the site. Shared parking may be used within the development. i Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 5 of 26 b. Permitted Uses The permitted uses in this zone shall be limited to light industrial, warehousing, and office as defined below. The uses shall be limited to those as defined herein. If there is a question as to whether or not a use meets the definition, the Community Development Director shall make that interpretation. Light Industrial - The manufacturing, compounding, processing, assembling, packaging, or testing of goods or equipment or research activities entirely within an enclosed structure. There shall be negligible impact. upon the surrounding environment by noise, vibration, smoke, dust or pollutants. Conferences/Convention Center - establishments designed to accommodate people in assembly, providing conference and meeting services to individuals, groups, and organizations. Contractor yard - means any area or use of land where vehicles, equipment, and/or construction materials and supplies commonly used by building, excavation, roadway construction, landscaping and similar contractors are stored or serviced. A contractor's yard includes both areas of outdoor storage and areas confined within a completely enclosed buildings used in conjunction with a contractor's business. Must comply with the following standards: (1) Equipment and supply storage must be screened or enclosed. Screening shall comply with Buffer Yard D and F4 Fencing as specified in Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code. (2) Vehicles/Equipment shall be stored within an enclosed or screened area. (3) No unlicensed or inoperable vehicle/equipment shall be stored on premises. (4) All chemicals shall be stored in proper storage facilities, specified by OSHA regulations. (5) The contractor shall be licensed, bonded and insured. Day Care - establishments providing for the care and supervision of infants and children on a daily basis. The following applies to Day care centers: (1) The site shall have loading and drop off points designed to avoid interfering with traffic and pedestrian movements. (2) Outdoor play areas shall be located and designed in a manner which mitigates visual and noise impacts on adjoining residential areas. (3) Each center shall obtain all applicable state, county, and city licenses. Health Services- establishments primarily engaged in furnishing medical, surgical and other health services to persons. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 6 of 26 Hotel/Motel - establishments engaged in furnishing lodging, or lodging and meals, to the general public. Must comply with the following standards: (1) The site shall have a covered entrance and a separated drop off area, which may not block the drive isle. (2) Parking: shall be located in the interiorlbehind building. Office - Professional and business office. Recreation/Health Club - establishments engaged in operating reducing and other health clubs, spas, and similar facilities featuring exercise and other physical fitness conditioning. Research Laboratory - establishments engaged in scientific research or study. Must comply with the following standards: (1) All chemicals and pollutants and waste must be stored, used and disposed of according to OSHA and Hazmatregulations and standards. (2) The building must be secure from persons other than laboratory personnel. (3) No outdoor experiments that cause hazards or excessive noise or odors shall be permitted on site. Utility services Warehousing - Means the commercial storage of merchandise and personal property. Ancillary Uses (in conjunction with and integral to a primary use) Antennas Screened outdoor storage - Outside storage is permitted, if approved by the City Council as part of the site plan review, subject to being completely screened with 100 percent opaque fence and/or landscape screening. Showroom - showroom type display area for products stored or manufactured on -site provided that no more than 20 percent of the floor space is used for such display and sales. Telecommunication Towers by conditional use permit only. Prohibited uses • Auto related including sales and repair • Churches • Garden Center Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 ,duly 19, 2005 Page 7 of 26 • Home fumishings and equipment stores • Home Improvement/Building Supply • Lumber Yard • Retail C. Setbacks The development is regulated by the PUD Standards. There are no minimum requirements for setbacks on interior lot lines in the PUD zone, except as specified below. The following setbacks shall apply: In the PUD standards, there is the requirement for landscape buffering in addition to building and parking setbacks. The following building and parking setbacks shall apply: Buffer yard, Setback building/parking (ft.) Error! Bookmark not defined.Galpin Blvd. C, 50, 50 Lyman Blvd. C, 50, 50 Street A NA, 30, 10 Interior Lot Lines B, 0, 0 West Perimeter Lot Line (adjacent to industrial) C, 30, 10 North Perimeter Lot Line (adjacent to residential): Buffer yard & setback D,100, 100 No fences shall be permitted between the required landscape buffer and arterial and collector roads. The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 70 percent for office and industrial uses. Any one sitellot can exceed the 70 percent requirement, but in no case may the entire finished development exceed 70 percent hard surface coverage. d. Development Standards Tabulation Box 1. Minimum Lot Dimensions a. Lot Area = one acre b. Frontage =150 feet; Minimum frontage on cul-de-sac = 60 feet c. Depth = 200 feet 2. ,Building Area Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page S of 26 Building Square Footage Breakdown: Use Percent Total Square Feet Office 30% 105,000 Light Industrial !Warehouse 70% 245,000 Total (Maximum) 1 350,000 The actual use percentages and square footage totals may vary provided that the total building square footages are not exceeded. 3. More than one (1) principal structure may be placed on one (1) platted lot. 4. Building height shall be limited to 3 stories or 4 feet. e. Building Materials and Design 1. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. 2. All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Masonry or higher quality material shall be used. Color shall be introduced through colored block or panels and not painted cinder block. 3. Brick may be used and must be approved to assure uniformity. 4. Block shall have a weathered face or be polished, fluted, or broken face. 5. Concrete may be poured in place, tilt -up or pre -cast, and shall be finished in stone, textured, coated, or painted. 6. Metal siding will not be approved except as support material to one of the above materials or curtain wall on office components or, as trim or as HVAC screen. 7. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with the primary structure. S. All roof mounted equipment shall be screened from adjacent public right-of-ways and the project perimeter by walls of compatible appearing material. or camouflaged to blend into the building or background. Wood screen fences are prohibited. All exterior process machinery, tanks, etc., are to be fully screened by compatible materials or landscaping. 9. The use of large unadorned, concrete panels and concrete block, or a solid wall unrelieved by architectural detailing, such as change in materials, change in color, fenestrations, or other significant visual relief provided in a manner or at intervals in keeping with the size, mass, and scale of the wall and its views from public ways shall be prohibited. Acceptable materials will incorporate textured surfaces, exposed aggregate and/or other patterning:" All Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 9 of 26 walls shall be given added architectural interest through building design or appropriate landscaping. The buildings shall have varied and interesting detailing. 10. Space for trash and recycling shall be provided in the interior of all principal structures or within an enclosure for each lot developed in the Business Park. 11 Each building shall contain one or more pitched roof elements depending on scale and type of building, or other architectural treatments such as towers, arches, vaults, entryway projections, canopies and detailing to add additional interest and articulation to structures. 12. There shall be no underdeveloped sides of buildings visible from public right-of-ways. All elevations visible from the street shall receive nearly equal treatment and visual qualities. E Site Landscaping and Screening 1. Landscaping along Lyman and Galpin Boulevards shall comply with buffer yard standard C. Landscaping along the northern project perimeter shall comply with buffer yard D. Landscaping along the westerly project perimeter shall comply with buffer yard B. All buffer yard plantings shall be installed as part of the subdivision. Each lot must presenta landscape plan for approval with the site plan review process. 2. Storage of material outdoors is prohibited unless it has been approved under site plan review. All approved outdoor storage must be screened with fences, walls andlor landscaping. 3. When parking lots are less than three feet above the adjacent roadway, an undulating or angular berm or elevation change of three feet or more in height shall be installed. All required boulevard landscaping shall be sodded. 4. Loading areas shall be screened 100 percent year round from public right-of-ways. Wing walls may be required where deemed appropriate. g. Signage I. The Chanhassen West Business Park PUD shall be permitted one project identification sign at the entrance on Galpin Boulevard. The sign shall not exceed eight feet in height. A maximum of 80 square feet of sign area shall be permitted. The project identification sign shall not be counted against the permitted signage on an individual parcel. 2. All freestanding parcel signs shall be limited to monument signs. The sign shall not exceed eighty (80) square feet in sign display area nor be greater than eight (8) feet in height. 3. Each property shall be allowed one monument sign per street frontage. 4. The signage will have consistency throughout the development. A common theme will be introduced at the development's entrance monument and will be used throughout. The sign treatment is an element of the architecture and thus should reflect the quality of the Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 10 of 26 development. The signs should be consistent in color, size, and material throughout the development. 5. Wall sign shall be permitted per city ordinance for industrial office park site. 6. All signs shall require a separate sign permit. h. Lighting 1. Lighting for the interior of the business center should be consistent throughout the development. 2. A decorative, shoe box fixture (high pressure sodium vapor lamps) with a square ornamental pole shall be used throughout the development area for area lighting. 3 Lighting equipment similar to what is mounted in the public street right-of-ways shall be used in the private areas. 4. All light fixtures shall be shielded. Light level for site lighting shall be no more than 1/2 candle at the property line. This does not apply to street lighting. i. Alternative Access 1. Each site shall accommodate transit service within the individual development, whenever possible. 2. Pedestrian access shall be provided from each site to the public sidewalk and trail system. 3. The developer and site users shall promote and encourage Traffic Demand Management Strategies. 4. Each site shall provide areas for bicycle parking and storage. 5. Preferential parking shall be provided for car and van pool vehicles within each site. SUBDIVISION REVIEW The applicant is proposing an eight -lot office -industrial development. LANDSCAPING/TREE PRESERVATION Minimum requirements for landscaping include 9,082 sq. ft. of.landscaped area around the parking lot, 36 trees for the parking lot, and buffcryard plantings along all property lines. The applicant's proposed as compared to the requirements for landscape area and parking lot trees is shown in the following table. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page II of 26 Required Pra osed North Prop. line 36 canopy trees 50 canopy bufferyard D — 25' width x 72 understory trees 120 understory 1200' length 108 shrubs 180 shrubs 75% of totals shown South property line 30 canopy trees 21 canopy trees bufferyard C -- 20' x 1000' 60 understory trees 40 understory trees 90 shrubs 60 shrubs East property line 37 canopy trees 22 canopy trees + 16 existing bufferyard C — 20' x 1240' trees 74 understory trees 57 understory trees 111 shrubs 42 shrubs West property line 11 canopy trees 17 canopy trees bufferyard B —15' x 720' 17 understory trees 35 understory trees 75% of totals shown 27 shrubs 53 shrubs The applicant does not meet minimum requirements for the buffer yards along the south and east property lines. Staff recommends that bufferyard plantings be increased in these areas to meet minimum requirements. The applicant has saved a large portion of the existing, mature oaks on site. This preservation will add a unique feel to the site and proved the residential neighborhood to the north an added buffer for the development. The applicant did an excellent job fitting the design to the site. GRADING DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL The existing site is about 40.15 acres in size with scattered wetlands. In addition, there are three existing buildings on the property which will have to be razed prior to any grading operations. The current plans show buildings with proposed floor elevations from 961-966. The applicant is now proposing to grade about 83% of the site for the new building pads, storm pond and a proposed street ending with a cul-de-sac. The current plans propose eight lots located along the proposed street and cul-de-sac. There are a few areas of concern with the grading plan. Staff would like to see the applicant do a better job of matching in with the existing topography of the site and maintain a side slope of 3:1 maximum. The existing site drains toward the existing three wetlands on the northwesterly and southwesterly corners and east side of the parcel. At these elevations, stormwater from the buildings and parking lots will drain toward the proposed catch basins and be conveyed via storm sewer system to the proposed storm pond on the southwesterly corner of the parcel. The pond will treat the water before discharging it to the adjacent wetland. All of the ponds are required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. The applicant is required to meet the existing site runoff rates for the 10-year and 100-year, 24-hour storm events. Storm sewer sizing calculations must be submitted at the time of final plat application. The storm sewer must be sized for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility easements must be dedicated on the final plat over the public storm drainage system including ponds, drainage swales, and wetlands up to the 100-year flood level. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 12 of 26 The applicant must be aware that a retaining wall structure is not allowed within the public street right-of-way. Also, any retaining wall exceeding four feetinheight must be designed by a registered structural engineer, with approved safety fence and a building permit must be obtained. Erosion control measures and site restoration must be developed in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Staff recommends that the City's Type 11 erosion control fence, which is a heavy duty silt fence, be used for the area adjacent to the existing wetlands on the north and south grading limits of the site. Type I silt fence shall be used in all other areas. A minimum 75-foot long rock construction entrance must be shown at the entrance drive that will be utilized during construction. In addition, tree preservation fencing must be installed at the limits of tree removal. Erosion control blankets are recommended for all of the steep 3:1 slopes with an elevation change of eight feet or more. All disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. The applicant should be aware that any off -site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes. A minimum 75-foot rock construction entrance must be added to the plans at the proposed access off of Galpin Boulevard. Storm Water Management The proposed development is required to maintain existing runoff rates and meet NURP standards. Storm water calculations should be submitted to ensure the proposed storm water pond is sized adequately for the proposed development. Easements Drainage and utility easements a minimum of 20 feet in width should be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used as PVC and storm water ponds. Erosion Control Stable emergency overflows are needed for the proposed pond on site. The emergency overflows should be clearly labeled on the plan and a detail is needed. The emergency overflows can be stabilized with a turf re -enforcement mat or fabric and riprap. Notes on the plan are needed describing timing of temporary stabilization with Type 1 mulch and seed or erosion control blanket and seed. Timing of stabilization will vary depending upon slope and if it is a concentrated flow area. The rate of mulch application is needed as well (2 tons per acre, disc anchored). All riprap/fabric at the flared end section must be installed within 24 hours of flared end section installation. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 13 of 26 Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of Slope Time Steeper than 3:1 7 days 10:1 to 3:1 14 days Flatter than 10:1 21 days (Maximum time an area can remain open when the area is not actively being worked.) These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water. Erosion control blanket should be specified in the swale from the flared end section to the wetland along the west boundary of the site. The blanket specified should adequately protect the area from designed velocity and depth of flow. The blanket and seed in the swale should be installed within 5 days of culvert installation. Erosion control blanket is recommended for the pond slopes from around 952 to 942 contours. All blanket. on the plan should be shown as a shaded area. Sediment Control Temporary sediment basins are needed prior to disturbing upslope areas. The areas of temporary sediment basins should be labeled on the plan. A temporary outlet (e.g., a perforated riser and rock cone) is needed for the pond; details should be provided. Temporary basins are needed in the area of the proposed permanent storm water pond, the southeast comer of the site prior to discharging to the culvert under Galpin Boulevard, and possibly in the northwest area of the site to handle water runon from the north prior to discharge to the wetland. The Wimco inlet control detail proposed will work for all curbside inlets. Any and all area inlets or drop inlets in paved areas will need alternate controls/Wimco details. The engineer should check on alternate designs for Wimco-type inlet controls to fit the various types of inlets. Additional inlet controls may be needed for adjacent inlets on Galpin Boulevard and Street. A. Silt fence will be needed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond the wetland. Type .1 and Type 2 silt fence locations need to be specified on the plan. Type 2 silt fence should be installed around all wetland areas and in the southeast corner of the site to protect the culvert under Galpin Boulevard. The silt fence should be extended along the south side to close the gap in the silt fence. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as needed. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 14 of 26 Surface Water Management Fees Water Quality Fees Because of the impervious surface associated with this development, the water quality fees for this proposed development are based on industrial development rates of $6,330/acre. Based on the proposed developed area of approximately 33.87 acres, the water quality fees associated with this project are $214,397. Water Quantity Fees The SWMP has established a connection charge for the different land uses based on an average citywide rate for the installation of water quantity systems. This cost includes land acquisition, proposed SWMP culverts, open channels, and storm water ponding areas for runoff storage. Industrial developments have a connection charge of $5,957 per developable acre. This results in a water quantity fee of approximately $201,764 for the proposed development. SWMP Credits This project proposes the construction of one NURP pond. The applicant will be credited for water quality where NURP basins are provided to treat runoff. This will be determined upon review of the ponding and storm sewer calculations. Credits may also be applied to the applicant's SWMP fees for the provision of outlet structures. The applicant will not be assessed for areas that are dedicated outlots. No credit will be given for temporary pond areas. At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $413,661. Other Aizencies The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase 11 construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval. UTILITIES Municipal sewer and water stubs are available to the site from Galpin Boulevard on the east side of the parcel. The applicant is proposing to connect to the existing utility stubs and extend them to the proposed lots to service the site. The sanitary and watermain lines that run within the public street.right-of-way and within the shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5 until the last. sanitary manhole will be considered a public utility line and the remaining will be considered private utility. Additional gate valves are needed for the shared private watermain between any two lots. Minimum 20-foot wide easements will be required over the public portion of the storm sewer lines between Lots 2 and 3. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 15 of 26 The underlying property has been previously assessed for sewer, water and street improvements and there is no remaining assessment due payable to the City. Since the developer will be responsible for extending lateral sewer and water service to the lots, the sanitary sewer and water connection charges will be waived. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. All of the utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Upon completion of the utility improvements, the utilities will be turned over to the City for maintenance and ownership. The applicant is also required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will have to be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. STREETS There is one public street proposed with the project. The street is proposed as a cul-de-sac running west of Galpin Boulevard and a private shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5. The applicant is proposing the paved streets to be 32-feet wide with a 60-foot wide right-of-way and a 46-foot cul-de-sac paved radius. The applicant must be aware that the City's standard commercial street pavement width is 36-foot wide from back -of -curb to back -of -curb and the cul-de-sac must be 48-foot in radius. Staff is fine with the 24-foot wide shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5. The developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 7-ton design. The proposed development lies west of Galpin Boulevard (CSAH 19) and north of Lyman .Boulevard (CSAH 18), A -Minor Expander Arterials as identified on SRF Consulting Group Incorporated's Functional Classification Map. Proposed access to the site will be from Galpin Boulevard, which aligns with Stone Creek Drive, an existing local street extending east of Galpin Boulevard. Staff has researched the feasibility to move the proposed site access from Galpin Boulevard to Lyman Boulevard in response to citizens' requests. Due to wetland conditions, access to Lyman Boulevard would be 1,000 feet west of Galpin Boulevard. Carver County has identified Lyman Boulevard as a regional east -west collector with limited access; therefore, Staff recommends that the access to Chanhassen West Business Park remain at the Galpin Boulevard/Stone Creek Drive intersection. This recommendation is also consistent with Section 18-57 of the City Code, which states that "access to arterial streets shall be at intervals of not less than one-fourth mile [1,320 feet] and through existing and established crossroads". SRF Consulting Group, Inc. analyzed the 2020 transportation system in conjunction with the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan. SRF's forecasted 2020 traffic volume for Galpin Boulevard was based on the 2020 Land Use Map and the construction of the new Trunk Highway 212. The Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 16 of 26 proposed land use of the Chanhassen West Business Park is consistent with the 2020 land use used in SRF's traffic analysis. SRF's report does not identify a need to upgrade Galpin Boulevard by the year 2020. Right turn lanes for north and southbound traffic exist at the Galpin Boulevard intersection with Stone Creek Road and the proposed site access. The developer must submit an access permit to Carver County Public Works for the proposed connection to Galpin Boulevard. As stipulated by the Assistant County Engineer, the developer must submit information on proposed turn lanes with the permit application. Staff has concerns of movements of truck traffic accessing off Galpin Boulevard to Lots 1 and 8 being too close. Staff recommends increasing the access width to 44 feet to create a three -lane access off Galpin Boulevard and increase the turning curb radius. Also, relocate Lots 1 and 8 easterly accesses further to the west and re -align them opposite of each other. The applicant should be aware that, in commercial districts, six-foot wide sidewalks are required and the parking driveway aisle must be 26-feet wide. Cross -access easements will be obtained for the shared driveways and recorded against the lots. PARKS AND RECREATION PARKS The proposed Chanhassen West Business Park is situated within the park service areas of Stone Creek Park and the Chanhassen Nature Preserve. Stone Creek Park is a seven -acre neighborhood park located across Galpin Boulevard. Amenities at the park include a sliding hill, basketball court, playground, benches and trails. The Chanhassen Nature Preserve is a 100-acre natural area featuring both wetland and upland areas and a comprehensive pedestrian trial system. TRAILS An existing section of the city's Comprehensive Trail Plan parallels the eastern border of the subject property. Future plans call for a pedestrian trail on the north side of Lyman Boulevard. Care should be taken to protect sufficient right-of-way for this future improvement. MISCELLANEOUS As part. of the future development of the site, the applicant should be aware of the following: Each site will require a separate site plan review. Drive aisle widths are 26 feet wide, not 24. The buildings are required to have an automatic fire extinguishing system. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19 2005 Page 17 of 26 The plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. The location of property lines will have an impact on the code requirements for the proposed buildings, including but not limited to; allowable size and fire -resistive construction. The plans as submitted do not have the information necessary to determine compliance at this time. The owner and or their representative shall meet with the Inspections Division as soon as possible to discuss property line issues as well as plan review and permit procedures. WETLANDS Existing Wetlands Eight Ag(Urban wetlands exist on -site and were delineated by Earth Science Associates, Inc. in October 2004. The wetlands on -site are generally highly disturbed and/or incidental as a result of the site being used historically as agricultural land and a contractor's yard. Basin F 1-30 (Wetland B) is a Type 2/3 wetland located in a farm field in the eastern portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass, smartweed and cattail. The hydrology of the wetland is affected by drain tile. The applicant is proposing to fill the wetland. The total proposed impact to Basin F 1-30 is 1.9,166 square feet (0.44 acres). Basin F 31-34 was included in the delineation, but has been found to be non -wetland. A no loss determination should be completed for Basin F 31-34. Basin F 35-50 is a Type 2 wetland located in the northwest corner of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass, stinging nettle and black willow. No impact is proposed to Basin F 35-50. Basin'F 51-80 N is a Type 2 wetland located in the southwestern portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass, stinging nettle and black and sandbar willow. The applicant is proposing to fill this wetland; however, it is an incidental wetland and is therefore exempt under MR 8420.0122 Subp. 5C. An exemption request should be completed for Basin F 51-80 N. Basin F 51-80 S is a Type 4 wetland located in the southwestern portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by cattail. No impact is proposed to Basin'F 51-80 S. Basin F 81-86 (Wetland D) is a Type 2 wetland located in the south central portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass. The applicant is proposing to fill this wetland. The total proposed impact to Basin F 81-86 is 3,920 square feet (0.09 acres). Basin F 87-90 (Wetland C) is a Type 2 wetland located in the south central portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass. The applicant is proposing to fill this wetland. The total proposed impact to Basin F 87-90 is 2,178 square feet (0.05 acres). Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 18 of 26 Basin F 91 97 is a Type 2 wetland located in the south central portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass. The applicant is proposing to fill this wetland; however, it is an incidental wetland and is therefore exempt under MR 8420.0122 Subp. 5C. An exemption request should be completed for Basin F 91-97. On December 30, 2004, City staff conducted an on -site review of the wetland delineation. The wetland boundaries shown on the plans are consistent with staff recommendation. Another wetland basin (Wetland A) is shown on the plans. This area was not identified in conjunction with the Earth Science Associates delineation. Upon review of the soil survey, National Wetland Inventory, aerial photography of the area and an on -site investigation of the basin on July 8, 2005, it has been determined that the wetland is incidental and is therefore exempt under MR 8420.0122 Subp. 5C. An exemption request should be completed for Wetland A. Wetland Replacement Wetland replacement must occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). A Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for Water/Wetland Projects (Parts I and H) should be submitted for the proposed project. The application should include sequencing discussions and sequencing flexibility requests, if applicable. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. A five-year wetland replacement monitoring plan should be submitted. The replacement monitoring plan should include a detailed management plan for invasive non-native species, particularly purple loosestrife and reed canary grass. The plans should show fixed photo monitoring points for the replacement wetland. The applicant should provide proof of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland. Several corrections must be made to the Wetland Mitigation Plan (sheet 10 of 13): 1. Wetland A is shown as an impact area. Upon finalization of exemption paperwork, mitigation will not be required for this wetland; 2. Wetland C (Basin F 87-90) is 0.05 acres in area; and 3. Wetland D (Basin F 81-86) is 0.09 acres in area. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) must be maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas should be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant must install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) should maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 19 of 26 The applicant must submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit should be effective for no less than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant should submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. COMPLIANCE TABLE Area (sq. ft.) Frontage (M) Depth (ft.) Notes Code 43,560 150 200 Lot 1 166,233 328 354 Lot 2 144,036 238 354 Lot 3 124,349 329 350 Wetland setback Lot 4 219,215 35 # 380 Wetland setback. Lot 5 156,190 75 @ 404 Wetland setback Lot 257,813 80 @ 460 North buffer yard Lot 7 82,385 205 366 Lot 8 97,843 328 368 Outlot A 180,643 Ponding and wetland mitigation Outlot B 92,577 Wetland Outlot C 165,365 ° Preserved woodlands ROW 162,069 1 1 11.42 acres Total 11,748,718 1 1 140.15 acres # Lot must be revised to meet the minimum 60 feet frontage on cul-de-sac. @ Exceeds the 60 feet frontage on cul-de-sac. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following three motions and adoption of the attached findings of fact and recommendation: A. "The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends rezoning of the property located within the Chanhassen West Business Park from Agricultural Estate District (A-2) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) incorporating the development design standards contained within this staff report based on the findings of fact attached to the report." B. "The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat for Chanhassen West Business Park, plans prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc., dated June 17, 2005, based on the findings of fact attached to the report and subject to the following conditions: Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 20 of 26 1. Applicant shall increase landscape plantings in the south and east property line bufferyards to meet minimum requirements. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted before final approval. 2. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to any construction activities. Fencing shall remain in place until construction is completed. 3. All trees shown as preserved on plans dated 6/17/05 shall be protected. Any trees damaged or removed shall be replaced at a rate of 2:1 diameter inches. 4. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). A Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for Water/Wetland Projects (Parts I and In shall be submitted for the proposed project. The application shall include sequencing discussions and sequencing flexibility requests, if applicable. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. 5. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. 6. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. 7. The proposed development shall maintain existing runoff rates and meet NURP standards. Storm water calculations shall be submitted to ensure the proposed storm water pond is sized adequately for the proposed development. S. Stable emergency overflows shall be provided for the proposed pond on site. The emergency overflows shall be clearly labeled on the plan and a detail is needed. The emergency overflows may be stabilized with a turf re -enforcement mat or fabric and riprap. 9. Notes on the plan describing timing of temporary stabilization with Type 1 mulch and seed or erosion control blanket. and seed shall be included. The notes shall include timing of stabilization as well as the rate of mulch application (2 tons per acre, disc anchored). 10. All riprap/fabric at the flared end section shall be installed within 24 hours of flared end section installation. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 21 of 26 1.1. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of Slope Time (Maximum time an area can Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area 10:1 to 3:1. 14 days is not actively being worked.) Flatter than 10:1 21 days These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water. 12. Erosion control blanket shall be specified in the Swale from the flared end section to the wetland along the west boundary of the site. The blanket specified shall adequately protect the area from designed velocity and depth of flow. The blanket and seed in the swale shall be installed within 5 days of culvert installation. Erosion control blanket is recommended for the pond slopes from around 952 to 942 contours. All blanket on the plan shall be shown as a shaded area. 13. Temporary sediment basins shall be installed prior to disturbing upslope areas. The areas of temporary sediment basins shall be labeled on the plan. A temporary outlet (e.g., a perforated riser and rock cone) shall be provided for the pond; details should be provided. Temporary basins shall be constructed in the area of the proposed permanent storm water pond, the southeast corner of the site prior to discharging to the culvert under Galpin Boulevard, and possibly in the northwest area of the site to handle water runon from the north prior to discharge to the wetland. 14. Any and all area inlets or drop inlets in paved areas shall be protected with alternate controls/Wimco details. The engineer shall. research and provide alternate designs for Wimco-type inlet controls to fit the various types of inlets. 15. Additional inlet controls shall be provided for adjacent inlets on Galpin Boulevard and Street A. 16. Silt fence shall be installed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond the wetland. 17. Type 1 and Type 2 silt fence locations shall be specified on the plan. Type 2 silt fence shall be installed around all wetland areas and in the southeast corner of the site to protect the culvert under Galpin Boulevard. The silt fence shall be extended along the south side to close the gap in the silt fence. 18. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 22 of 26 19. The estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $413,661. 20. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase H construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval. 21. In lieu of parkland dedication and trail construction, full park fees shall be collected at the rate in force at the time of final plat for the proposed Chanhassen West Business Park. At current rates, the park fee would total $359,500 (35.95 x $10,000 per acre). 22. A demolition permit must be obtained before beginning demolition of any existing structures. 23. Retaining walls over four high must be designed by a professional engineer and a permit must be obtained prior to construction. 24. Provide a water service for Lot 6. 25. A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. 26. Fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for fire protection is required to be installed. Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction except when approved alternate methods of protection are provided. 27. The new proposed street will be required to have a street name. Submit proposed street name to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval. 28. No burning permits will be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. 29. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed load of fire apparatus and shall be surfaced so as to provide all weather driving capabilities. Pursuant to Minnesota Fire code Section 503.2.3. 30. Temporary street signs shall be installed on street intersections when construction of a new roadway allows passage be vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota fire code Section 501.4. 31. Prior to final platting, storm sewer design data will need to be submitted for staff review. Depending on the size of the drainage area, additional catch basins may be required at that. time. The storm sewer will have to be designed for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility easements will need to be dedicated on the final plat over the public Z� �s O C7 �- ti • z s IIIIIIII iNl III IIIIIII IIIIII IIII III IIIII IIIINEWDOC .f - x NEWDOC i t 4 'y 1 a- STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Request for Rezoning of property from Agricultural Estate District (A-2) to Planned Unit Development (PUD), Preliminary Plat Approval, and Wetland Alteration Permit — Chanhassen West Business Park. LOCATION: The northwest corner of the intersection of Lyman Boulevard and Galpin Boulevard APPLICANT: Eden Trace Corporation Volk Minger Partnership 8156 Mallory Court P. O. Box 236 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 361-0722 (952) 470-1753 PRESENT ZONING: Agricultural Estate District, A2 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Office/Industrial ACREAGE: 40.15 acres DENSITY: F.A.R 0.18 -- 0.33 SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant in proposing an Office -Industrial Planned Unit development consisting of eight lots and three outlots with a wetland alteration permit to fill and alter wetlands within the development. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION -MAKING: The City has a relatively high level of discretion in approving rezonings, PUD's, and amendments to PUD's because the City is acting in its legislative or policy making capacity. A rezoning or PUD, and amendment thereto, must be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The City's discretion in approving or denying a . preliminary plat is limited to whether or not the proposed plat meets the standards outlined in the Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Ordinance. If it meets these standards, the City must approve the preliminary plat. This is a quasi judicial decision. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 2 of 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant is proposing an office -industrial Planned Unit Development. The development consists of eight lots, three outlots and public right-of-way. The developer proposes creation of a common open space to preserve wooded areas within the development. Access is proposed at the existing driveway entrance off Galpin Boulevard. Ponding for the development is proposed in the southwest corner of the project. Water and sewer service are available to the site. The purpose of this development is to create a PUD light industrial/office park. The use of the PUD zone is to allow for more flexible development while creating a higher quality and more sensitive proposal. The standards are partially based on the uses within the Industrial Office Park District (IOP), but provide additional requirements not included in the IOP district. The PUD design standards will be incorporated in an ordinance which will regulate the development of the site. The property to the north is a residential single-family subdivision, Trotters Ridge, which is zoned Planned Unit Development -Residential. The property to the east, across Galpin Boulevard, is a residential single-family subdivision, Stone Creek, which is zoned Single -Family Residential. The property to the south, across Lyman Boulevard, contains the Holasek nursery, which is currently zoned Agricultural Estate District and is guided for OfficeAndustrial use. Both Galpin Boulevard and Lyman Boulevard are classified as minor arterial roadways in the City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan. Minor arterial. roadways are intended and designed to carry higher traffic volumes. As the city continues to grow, Galpin Boulevard will provide mobility for north -south traffic flow to destinations within the city as well as the regional transportation system. The property has abandoned farming uses on the northern and eastern portions of the site; abandoned mining and excavating operation on the western and southwest portions of the property; and landscaping and contracting operations are located on the central portion of the property. A house is located in the southeast corner of the property. Three large wetland areas are located in the east central, northwest, and southwest of the property. The site is significantly wooded in the north central area. The property has a high point of approximately 980 feet in the north central area and a low point of 940 feet in the southwest corner of the property. The property is bounded by Galpin and Lyman Boulevards. Staff is recommending that the preliminary Planned Unit Development, preliminary plat and wetland alteration permit be approved. BACKGROUND On August 12,1996, City Council denied a Land Use Map Amendment #96-1b from Office/Industrial to Residential Medium Density for the northerly 22.6 acres, conceptual and preliminary approval of PUD #96-2, preliminary plat approval for 23 lots and associated right- of-way, Site Plan Review #96-5 approval for 140 townhouse units, and Wetland Alteration Permit #95-2b. In the summer of 1995, Scherber Partnership Properties requested a land use map amendment from Office/Industrial to Residential - Low Density, a rezoning to Single Family Residential, Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 3of3 RSF, and preliminary plat approval to permit 59 single-family lots. City staff recommended denial of the land use map amendment and consequently the rezoning and subdivision. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend denial of the development, and the City Council tabled the item, with the consent of the applicant, to permit staff and the applicant to work out a compromise for the development of the parcel. However, in February, 1996, the applicant formally withdrew the development application. On February 13, 1987, City Council approved CUP #87-1 for a landscape contractors yard and a wholesale nursery and a variance to permit a contractor's yard within one mile of an existing contractor's yard (on the same property). On November 19, 1984, the City Council approved a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), #84-13, to permit. a contractors yard for R & W Sanitation on the southeasterly 32 acres of the site. Such approval included the storage and repair of garbage trucks. The property was zoned R-1A, Agricultural Residence District. On November 19, 1984, the City Council also approved CUP #84-14 for a contractors yard to include the storage and repair of construction equipment. In April, 1982, the property owner, Volk, applied for a building permit to reconstruct a pole barn which had collapsed due to heavy snow. The building permit was denied because the storage and repair of excavating equipment in the pole bam was not a permitted use in the R-IA district at that time. Mr. Volk petitioned the Council on May 17, 1982 to issue the building permit. The City Council approved the issuance of the building permit subject to Mr. Volk applying for a rezoning request from R-lA to 1-1. Mr. Volk made an application for the rezoning and a comprehensive land use plan amendment. On June 25, 1982, the Planning Commission recommended denial of the request. The City Council considered the request on October 4, 1982. The Council tabled the item until staff completed a survey of all contractors' yards as well as other non -conforming uses in the city. The City Council amended the Zoning Ordinance to allow contractor's yards as CUPS in the R- l A zone on August 20, 1984. On November 12, 1980, a rezoning request from R-1A to I-1 on the parcel was considered by the Planning Commission. At that meeting, the request was revised to an ordinance amendment to permit contractors' businesses and storage yards as conditional uses in the R-lA district. The Planning Commission recommended denial of the request. The City Council subsequently denied the request on January 5, 1981. REZONING Justification for Rezoning_to_PUD The applicant is requesting to rezone approximately 45 acres from A2, Agricultural Estate District, to PUD, Planned Unit Development for an Office/Industrial Park. The project consists of eight lots. This property was one of four areas designated for Office/industrial use as part of the 1991 comprehensive plan update. The review criteria are taken from the intent section of the PUD Ordinance. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19,, 2005 Page 4 of 4 Section 20-501. Intent Planned unit developments offer enhanced flexibility to develop a site through the relaxation of most normal zoning district standards. The use of the PUD in this instance is to permit impervious surface clustering within the development in order to preserve a significant area of trees. The use of the PUD zoning also allows for an internal transfer of site coverage. In exchange for this enhanced flexibility, the City has the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the other more standard zoning districts. The proposed development provides a compatible development with the surrounding development subject to the recommended modifications to the plan. The proposed and rezoning assist in the furtherance of the following land use goals of the City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan: Recognizing that some uses pay their own way in terms of the property taxes generated and some uses do not, Chanhassen will strive for a mixture of development which will assure it financial future. Development will be encouraged within the MUSA line. Planned industrial development will be encouraged as a means of encouraging tax base growth and creating new employment opportunities. Development should be phased in accordance with the ability of the city to provide services. Development shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS Staff is proposing the following development standards govern the development of the property. Development Standards a. Intent The purpose of this zone is to create a PUD light industrial/office park. The use of the PUD zone is to allow for more flexible design standards while creating a higher quality and more sensitive proposal. All utilities are required to be placed underground. Each lot proposed for development shall proceed through site plan review based on the development standards outlined below as well as the Design Standards for Commercial, Industrial and Office -Institutional Developments contained in Chapter 20, Article =, Division 7, of the Chanhassen City Code. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. Ancillary uses may be permitted as listed below once a primary use has occupied the site. Shared parking may be used within the development. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 5 of 5 b. Permitted Uses The permitted uses in this zone shall be limited to light industrial, warehousing, and office as defined below. The uses shall be limited to those as defined herein. If there is a question as to whether or not a use meets the definition, the Community Development Director shall make that interpretation. Light Industrial -The manufacturing, compounding, processing, assembling, packaging, or testing of goods or equipment or research activities entirely within an enclosed structure. There shall be negligible impact upon the surrounding environment by noise, vibration, smoke, dust or pollutants. Conferences/Convention Center - establishments designed to accommodate people in assembly, providing conference and meeting services to individuals, groups, and organizations. Contractor yard - means any area or use of land where vehicles, equipment, and/or construction materials and supplies commonly used by building, excavation, roadway construction, landscaping and similar contractors are stored or serviced. A contractor's yard includes both areas of outdoor storage and areas confined within a completely enclosed buildings used in conjunction with a contractor's business. Must comply with the following standards: (1) Equipment and supply storage must be screened or enclosed. Screening shall comply with Buffer Yard D and F4 Fencing as specified in Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code. (2) Vehicles/Equipment shall be stored within an enclosed or screened area. (3) No unlicensed or inoperable vehicle/equipment shall be stored on premises. (4) All chemicals shall be stored in proper storage facilities, specified by OSHA regulations. (5) The contractor shall be licensed, bonded and insured. Day Care - establishments providing for the care and supervision of infants and children on a daily basis. The following applies to Day care centers: (1) The site shall have loading and drop off points designed to avoid interfering with traffic and pedestrian movements. (2) Outdoor play areas shall be located and designed in a manner which mitigates visual and noise impacts on adjoining residential areas. (3) Each center shall obtain all applicable state, county, and city licenses. Health Services- establishments primarily engaged in furnishing medical, surgical and other health services to persons, Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 6 of 6 not bige., Office -Professional and business office. RecreationlHealth Club - establishments engaged in operating reducing and other health clubs, spas, and similar facilities featuring exercise and other physical fitness conditioning. Research Laboratory - establishments engaged in scientific research or study. Must comply with the following standards: (1) All chemicals and pollutants and waste must be stored, used and disposed of according to OSHA and Hazmat regulations and standards. (2) The building must be secure from persons other than laboratory personnel. (3) .No outdoor experiments that cause hazards or excessive noise or odors shall be permitted on site. Utility services `Warehousing Means the commercial storage of merchandise and,personal property - Ancillary Uses (in conjunction with and integral to a primary use) Antennas Screened outdoor storage - Outside storage. is permitted, if approved by the City Council as part of the site plan review, subject to being completely screened with 100 percent opaque fence and/or landscape screening. Showroom - showrodm type display area for products stored or manufactured on -site provided that no more than 20 percent of the floor space is used for such display and sales. Telecommunication Towers by conditional use permit only. Prohibited uses 0 Auto related including sales and repair • Churches 0 Garden Center Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 7 of 7 , • Home furnishings and equipment stores • Home Improvement/Building Supply • Lumber Yard • Retail C. Setbacks The development is regulated by the PUD Standards. There are no minimum requirements for setbacks on interior lot lines in the PUD zone, except as specified below. The following setbacks shall apply: In the PUD standards, there is the requirement for landscape buffering in addition to building and parking setbacks. The following building and parking setbacks shall apply: Buffer yard, Setback. building/parking (ft.) Gal in Blvd. C, 50, 50 Lyman Blvd. C, 50, 50 Street A NA, 30, 10 Interior Lot Lines B, 0, 0 West Perimeter Lot Line (adjacent to industrial) C, 30, 20 North Perimeter Lot Line (adjacent; to residential): Buffer yard & setback D, 100, 100 No fences shall be permitted between the required landscape buffer and arterial and collector roads. The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 70 percent for office and industrial uses. Any one site/lot can exceed the 70 percent requirement, but in no case may the entire finished development exceed 70 percent hard surface coverage. d. Development Standards Tabulation Box 1. Minimum Lot Dimensions a. Lot Area = one acre b. Frontage= 150 feet; Minimum frontage on cul-de-sac = 60 feet c. Depth = 200 feet 2. Building Area Building Square Footage. Breakdown: 0 Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 8 of 8 Use Percent Total Square Feet Office 30% 105,000 Li ht Industrial /Warehouse 70% 245,000 Total (Maximum) 350,000 The actual use percentages and square footage totals may vary provided that the total building square footages are not exceeded. 3. More than one (1) principal structure may be placed on one (1) platted lot. 4. Building height shall be limited to 3 stories or 40 feet. e. Building Materials and Design 1. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. 2. All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Masonry or higher quality material shall be used. Color shall be introduced through colored block or panels and not painted cinder block. 3. Brick may be used and must be approved to assure uniformity. 4. Block shall have a weathered face or be polished, fluted, or broken face. S. Concrete maybe poured in place, tilt -up or pre -cast, and shall be finished in stone, textured, coated, or painted. 6. Metal siding will not be approved except as support material to one of the above materials or curtain wall on office components or, as trim or as HVAC screen. 7. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with the primary structure. S. All roof mounted equipment shall be screened from adjacent public right-of-ways and the project perimeter by walls of compatible appearing material or camouflaged to blend into the building or background. Wood screen fences are prohibited. All exterior process machinery, tanks, etc., are to be fully screened by compatible materials or landscaping. 9. The use of large unadorned, concrete panels and concrete block, or a solid wall unrelieved by architectural detailing, such as change in materials, change in color, fenestrations, or other significant visual relief provided in a manner or at intervals in keeping with the size, mass, and scale of the wall and its views from public ways shall be prohibited. Acceptable materials will incorporate textured surfaces, exposed aggregate and/or other patterning. All walls shall be given added architectural interest through building design or appropriate landscaping. The buildings shall have varied and interesting detailing. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 9 of 9 10. Space for trash and recycling shall be provided in the interior of all principal structures or within an enclosure for each lot developed in the Business Park. I I Each building shall contain one or more pitched roof elements depending on scale and type of building, or other architectural treatments such as towers, arches, vaults, entryway projections, canopies and detailing to add additional interest and articulation to structures. 12. There shall be no underdeveloped sides of buildings visible from public right-of-ways. All elevations visible from the street shall receive nearly equal treatment and visual qualities. f. Site Landscaping and Screening 1. Landscaping along Lyman and Galpin Boulevards shall comply with buffer yard standard C. Landscaping along the northern project perimeter shall comply with buffer yard D. Landscaping along the westerly project perimeter shall comply with buffer yard B. All buffer yard plantings shall be installed as part of the subdivision. Each lot must present a landscape plan for approval with the site plan review process. 2. Storage of material outdoors is prohibited unless it has been approved under site plan review. All approved outdoor storage must be screened with fences, walls and/or landscaping. 3. When parking lots are less than three feet above the adjacent roadway, an undulating or angular berm or elevation change of three feet or more in height shall be installed. All required boulevard landscaping shall be sodded. 4. Loading areas shall be screened 100 percent year round from public right-of-ways. Wing walls may be required where deemed appropriate. g. Signage The Chanhassen West Business Park PUD shall be permitted one project identification sign at the entrance on Galpin Boulevard. The sign shall not exceed eight feet in height. A maximum of 80 square feet of sign area shall be permitted. The project identification sign shall not be counted against the permitted signage on an individual parcel. 2. All freestanding parcel signs shall be limited to monument signs. The sign shall not exceed. eighty (80) square feet in sign display area nor be greater than eight (8) feet in height. 3. Each property shall be allowed one monument sign per street frontage. 4. The signage will have consistency throughout the development. A common theme will be introduced at the development's entrance monument and will be used throughout. The sign treatment is an element of the architecture and thus should reflect the quality of the development. The signs should be consistent in color, size, and material throughout the development. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 10 of 10 S. Wall sign shall be permitted per city ordinance for industrial office park site. 6. All signs shall require a separate sign permit. h. Lighting 1. Lighting for the interior of the business center should be consistent: throughout the development. 2. A decorative, shoe box fixture (high pressure sodium vapor lamps) with a square ornamental pole shall be used throughout the development area for area lighting. ' 3 Lighting equipment similar to what is mounted in the public street right-of-ways shall be used in the private areas. 4. All light fixtures shall be shielded. Light level for site lighting shall be no more than 1/2 candle at the property line. This does not apply to street lighting. i. Alternative Access 1. Each site shall accommodate transit. service within the individual development, whenever possible. 2. Pedestrian access shall be provided from each site to the public sidewalk and trail system. 3. The developer and site users shall promote and encourage Traffic Demand. Management Strategies. 4. Each site shall provide areas for bicycle parking and storage. 5. Preferential parking shall be provided for car and van pool vehicles within each site. SUBDIVISION REVIEW The applicant is proposing an eight -lot office -industrial development. LANDSCAPINGITREE PRESERVATION Minimum requirements for landscaping include 9,082 sq. ft. of landscaped area around the parking lot, 36 trees for the parking lot, and bufferyard plantings along all property lines. The applicant's proposed as compared to the requirements for landscape area and parking lot trees is shown in the following table. Required Proposed North Prop, line 136 canoRy trees 50 canopy Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 11 of 11 bufferyard D -- 25' width x 72 understory trees 120 understory 1200' length 108 shrubs 180 shrubs 75% of totals shown South property -line 30 canopy trees 21 canopy trees bufferyard C — 20' x 1000' 60 understory trees 40 understory trees 90 shrubs 60 shrubs East property line 37 canopy trees 22 canopy trees + 16 existing bufferyard C — 20' x 1240' trees 74 understory trees 57 understory trees I I I shrubs 42 shrubs West property line 1.1 canopy trees 17 canopy trees bufferyard B —15' x 720' 1.7 understory trees 35 understory trees 75% of totals shown 27 shrubs 53 shrubs The applicant does not meet minimum requirements for the buffer yards along the south and east property lines. Staff recommends that bufferyard plantings be increased in these areas to meet minimum requirements. The applicant has saved a large portion of the existing, mature oaks on site. This preservation will add a unique.feel to the site and proved the residential neighborhood to the north an added buffer for the development. The applicant did an excellent job fitting the design to the site. GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL The existing site is about 40.15 acres in size with scattered wetlands. In addition, there are three existing buildings on the property which will have to be razed prior to any grading operations. The current plans show buildings with proposed floor elevations from 961-966. The applicant is now proposing to grade about 83% of the site for the new building pads, storm pond and a proposed street ending with a cul-de-sac. The current plans propose eight lots located along the proposed street and cul-de-sac. There are a few areas of concern with the grading plan. Staff would like to see the applicant do a better job of matching in with the existing topography of the site and maintain a side slope of 3:1 maximum. The existing site drains toward the existing three wetlands on the northwesterly and southwesterly comers and east side of the parcel. At these elevations, stormwater from the buildings and parking lots will drain rtoward the proposed catch basins and be conveyed via storm sewer system to the proposed storm pond on the southwesterly corner of the parcel. The pond will treat the water before discharging it to the adjacent wetland. All of the ponds are required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. The applicant is required to meet the existing site runoff rates for the 10-year and 100-year, 24-hour storm events. Storm sewer sizing calculations must be submitted at the time of final plat application. The storm sewer must be sized for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility easements must be dedicated on the final plat over the'public storm drainage system including ponds, drainage swales, and wetlands up to the 100-year flood level. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 12 of 12 The applicant must be aware that a retaining wall structure is not allowed within the public street right -of --way. Also, any retaining wall exceeding four feet in height must be designed by a registered structural engineer, with approved safety fence and a building permit must be obtained. Erosion control measures and site restoration must be developed in accordance`with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Staff recommends that the City's Type II erosion control fence, which is a heavy duty silt fence, be used for the area adjacent to the existing wetlands on the north and south grading limits of the site. Type.I silt fence shall be used in all other areas. A minimum 75-foot long rock construction entrance must be shown at the entrance drive that will be utilized during construction. In addition, tree preservation fencing must be installed at the limits of tree removal. Erosion control blankets are recommended for all of the steep 3:1 slopes with an elevation change of eight feet or more. All disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. The applicant should be aware that any off -site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes. A minimum 75-foot rock construction entrance must be added to the plans at the proposed access off of Galpin Boulevard. Storm Water Management The proposed development is required to maintain existing runoff rates and meet NURP standards. Storm water calculations should be submitted to ensure the proposed storm water pond is sized adequately for the proposed. development. Easements Drainage and utility easements a minimum of 20 feet in width should be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used as PVC and storm water ponds. Erosion Control Stable emergency overflows are needed for the proposed pond on site. The emergency overflows should be clearly labeled on the plan and a detail is needed. The emergency overflows can be stabilized with a turf re -enforcement mat or fabric and riprap. Notes on the plan are needed describing timing of temporary stabilization with Type I mulch and seed or erosion control blanket and seed. Timing of stabilization will vary depending upon slope and if it is a concentrated flow area. The rate of mulch application is needed as well (2 tons per acre, disc anchored). All riprap/fabric at the flared end section must be installed within 24 hours of flared end section installation. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July .19, 2005 Page 13of13 Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: !me of Sloe Time Steeper than 3:1 7 days 10:1 to 3:1 14 days Flatter than 10:1 21 days (Maximum time an area can remain open when the area is not actively being worked.) These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water. Erosion control blanket should be specified in the swale from the flared end section to the wetland along the west boundary of the site. The blanket specified should adequately protect the area from designed velocity and depth of flow. The blanket and seed in the swale should be installed within 5 days of culvert installation. Erosion control blanket is recommended for the pond slopes from around 952 to 942 contours. All blanket on the plan should be shown as a shaded area. Sediment Control Temporary sediment basins are needed prior to disturbing upslope areas. The areas of temporary sediment basins should be labeled on the plan. A temporary outlet (e.g., a perforated riser and rock cone) is needed for the pond; details should be provided. Temporary basins are needed in the area of the proposed permanent storm water pond, the southeast corner of the site prior to discharging to the culvert under Galpin Boulevard, and possibly in the northwest area of the site to handle water runon from the north prior to discharge to the wetland. The Wimco inlet control detail proposed will work for all curbside inlets. Any and all area inlets or drop inlets in paved areas will need alternate controls/Wimco details. The engineer should check on alternate designs for Wimco-type inlet controls to fit the various types of inlets. Additional inlet controls may be needed for adjacent inlets on Galpin Boulevard and Street A. Silt fence will be needed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond the wetland. Type 1 and Type 2 silt fence locations need to be specified on the plan. Type 2 silt fence should be installed around all wetland areas and in the southeast corner of the site to protect the culvert under Galpin Boulevard. The silt fence should be extended along the south side to close the gap in the silt fence. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as needed. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 14 of 14 Surface Water Management Fees Water Quality Fees Because of the impervious surface associated with this development, the water quality fees for this proposed development are based on industrial development rates of $6,3301acre. Based on the proposed developed area of approximately 33.87 acres, the water quality fees associated with this project are $214,397. Water Quantity Fees The SWMP has established a connection charge for the different land uses based on an average citywide rate for the installation of water quantity systems. This cost includes land acquisition, proposed SWMP culverts, open channels, and storm water ponding areas for runoff storage. Industrial developments have a connection charge of $5,957 per developable acre. This results in a water quantity fee of approximately $201,764 for the proposed development. SWMP Credits This project proposes the construction of one NURP pond. The applicant will be credited for water quality where NURP basins are provided to treat runoff. This will be determined upon review of the ponding and storm sewer calculations. Credits may also be applied to the applicant's SWMP fees for the provision of outlet structures. The applicant will not be assessed for areas that are dedicated outlots. No credit will be given for temporary pond areas. At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $413,661. Other A encies The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase H construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval. UTILITIES Municipal sewer and water stubs are available to the site from Galpin Boulevard on the east side of the parcel. The applicant is proposing to connect to the existing utility stubs and extend them to the proposed lots to service the site. The sanitary and watermain lines that run within the public street right-of-way and within the shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5 until the last sanitary manhole will be considered a public utility line and the remaining will be considered private utility. Additional gate valves are needed for the shared private watermain between any two lots. Minimum 20-foot wide easements will be required over the public portion of the storm sewer lines between Lots 2 and 3. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page :15 of 15 The underlying property has been previously assessed for sewer, water and street improvements and there is no remaining assessment due payable to the City. Since the developer will be responsible for extending lateral sewer and water service to the lots, the sanitary sewer and water connection charges will be waived. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. All of the utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Upon completion of the utility improvements, the utilities will be turned over to the City for maintenance and ownership. The applicant is also required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will have to be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. STREETS There is one public street proposed with the project. The street is proposed as a cul-de-sac running west of Galpin Boulevard and a private shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5. The applicant is proposing the paved streets to be 32-feet wide with a 60-foot wide right-of-way and a 46-foot cul-de-sac paved radius. The applicant must be aware that the City's standard commercial street pavement width is 36-foot wide from back -of -curb to back -of -curb and the cul-de-sac must be 48-foot in radius. Staff is fine with the 24-foot wide shared driveway between Tots 4 and 5. The developer will be required to submit. inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 7-ton design. The proposed development lies west of Galpin Boulevard (CSAH 19) and north of Lyman Boulevard (CSAH 18), A -Minor Expander Arterials as identified on SRF Consulting Group Incorporated's Functional Classification Map. Proposed access to the site will be from Galpin Boulevard, which aligns with Stone Creek Drive, an existing local street extending east of Galpin Boulevard. Staff has researched the feasibility to move the proposed site access from Galpin Boulevard to Lyman Boulevard in response to citizens' requests. Due to wetland conditions, access to Lyman Boulevard would be 1,000 feet west of Galpin Boulevard. Carver County has identified Lyman Boulevard as a regional east -west collector with limited access; therefore, Staff recommends that the access to Chanhassen West Business Park remain at the Galpin Boulevard/Stone Creek Drive intersection. This recommendation is also consistent with Section 18-57 of the City Code, which states that "access to arterial streets shall be at intervals of not less than one-fourth mile [1,320'feet] and through existing and established crossroads". SRF Consulting Group, Inc. analyzed the 2020 transportation system in conjunction with the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan. SRF's forecasted 2020 traffic volume for Galpin Boulevard was based on the 2020 Land Use Map and the construction of the new Trunk Highway 212. The Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 16 of 16 proposed land use of the Chanhassen West Business Park is consistent with the 2020 land use used in SRF's traffic analysis. SRF's report does not identify a need to upgrade Galpin Boulevard by the year 2020. Right turn lanes for north and southbound traffic exist at the Galpin Boulevard intersection with Stone Creek. Road and the proposed site access. The developer must submit an access permit to Carver County Public Works for the proposed connection to Galpin Boulevard. As stipulated by the Assistant County Engineer, the developer must submit information on proposed turn lanes with the permit application. Staff has concerns of movements of truck traffic accessing off Galpin Boulevard to Lots 1 and 8 being too close. Staff recommends increasing the access width to 44 feet to create a three -lane access off Galpin Boulevard and increase the turning curb radius. Also, relocate Lots 1 and 8 easterly accesses further to the west and re -align them opposite of each other. The applicant should be aware that, in commercial districts, six-foot wide sidewalks are required and the parking driveway aisle must be 26-feet wide. Cross -access easements will be obtained for the shared driveways and recorded against the lots. PARKS AND RECREATION PARKS The proposed Chanhassen West Business Park is situated within the park service areas of Stone Creels Park and the Chanhassen Nature Preserve. Stone Creek Park is a seven -acre neighborhood park located across Galpin Boulevard. Amenities at the park include a sliding hill, basketball court, playground, benches and trails. The Chanhassen Nature Preserve is a 100-acre natural area featuring both wetland and upland areas and a comprehensive pedestrian trial system. r TRAILS An existing section of the city's Comprehensive Trail Plan parallels the eastern border of the subject property. Future plans call for a pedestrian trail on the north side of Lyman Boulevard. Care should be taken to protect sufficient right-of-way for this future improvement. MISCELLANEOUS As part of the future development of the site, the applicant should be aware of the following: Each site will require a separate site plan review. Drive aisle widths are 26 feet wide, not 24. The buildings are required to have an automatic fire extinguishing system. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 17 of 17 The plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. The location of property lines will have an impact on the code requirements for the proposed buildings, including but not limited to; allowable size and fire -resistive construction. The plans as submitted do not have the information necessary to determine compliance at this time. The owner and or their representative shall meet with the Inspections Division as soon as possible to discuss property line issues as well as plan review and permit procedures. WETLANDS Existing Wetlands Eight Ag/Urban wetlands exist on -site and were delineated by Earth Science Associates, Inc. in October 2004. The wetlands on -site are generally highly disturbed and/or incidental as a result of the site being used historically as agricultural land and a contractor's yard. Basin F 1-30 (Wetland B) is a Type 2/3 wetland located in a farm field in the eastern portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass, smartweed and cattail. The hydrology of the wetland is affected by drain tile. The applicant is proposing to fill the wetland. The total proposed impact to Basin F 1-30 is 19,166 square feet (0.44 acres). Basin F 31-34 was included in the delineation, but has been found to be non -wetland. A no loss determination should be completed for Basin F 31-34. Basin F 35-50 is a Type 2 wetland located in the northwest corner of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass, stinging nettle and black willow. No impact is proposed to Basin F 35-50. Basin F 51-80 N is a Type 2 wetland located in the southwestern portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass, stinging nettle and black and sandbar willow. The applicant is proposing to fill this wetland; however, it is an incidental wetland and is therefore exempt under MR 8420.0122 Subp. 5C. An exemption request should be completed for Basin F 51-80 N. Basin F 51-80 S. is a Type 4 wetland located in the southwestern portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by cattail. No impact is proposed to Basin F 51-80 S. Basin F 81.-86 (Wetland D) is a Type 2 wetland located in the south central portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass. The applicant is proposing to fill this wetland. The total proposed impact to Basin F 81-86 is 3,920 square feet (0.09 acres). Basin F 87-90 (Wetland C) is a Type 2 wetland located in the south central portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass. The applicant is proposing to fill this wetland. The total proposed impact to Basin F 87-90 is 2,178 square feet (0.05 acres). Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 18 of 18 Basin F 91-97 is a Type 2 wetland located in the south central portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass. The applicant is proposing to fill this wetland; however, it is an incidental wetland and is therefore exempt under MR 8420.0122 Subp. 5C. An exemption request should be completed for Basin.F 91-97. On December 30, 2004, City staff conducted an on -site review of the wetland delineation. The wetland boundaries shown on the plans are consistent with staff recommendation. Another wetland basin (Wetland A) is shown on the plans. This area was not identified in conjunction with the Earth Science Associates delineation. Upon review of the soil survey, National Wetland Inventory, aerial photography of the area and an on -site investigation of the basin on July 8, 2005, it has been determined that the wetland is incidental and is therefore exempt under MR 8420.0122 Subp. 5C. An exemption request should be completed for Wetland A. Wetland Replacement Wetland replacement.must occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). A Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for Water/Wetland Projects (Parts I and 11) should be submitted for the proposed project. The application should include sequencing discussions and sequencing flexibility requests, if applicable. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. A five-year wetland replacement monitoring plan should be submitted. The replacement monitoring plan should include a detailed management plan for invasive non-native species, particularly purple loosestrife and reed canary grass. The plans should show fixed photo monitoring points for the replacement wetland. The applicant should provide proof of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for. Replacement Wetland. Several corrections must be made to the Wetland Mitigation Plan (sheet 10 of 13): 1. Wetland A is shown as an impact area. Upon finalization of exemption paperwork, mitigation will not be required for this wetland; 2. Wetland C (Basin F 87-90) is 0.05 acres in area; and 3. Wetland (BasinF 81-86) is 0.09 acres in area. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) must. be maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas should be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant must install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) should maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 19 of 19 The applicant must submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit should be effective for no less than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant. should submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. COMPLIANCE TABLE Area (s . ft.) Frontage (ft.) Depth M) Notes Code 43,560 150 200 Lot 1 166,233 328 354 Lot 2 144,036 238 354 Lot 3 124,349 329 350 Wetland setback Lot 4 219,215 35 # 380 Wetland setback Lot 5 156,190 75 @ 404 Wetland setback Lot 6 257,813 80 @ 460 North buffer yard Lot.7 82,385 205 366 Lot 8 .97,843 328 368 Outlot A 180,643 Ponding and wetland mitigation Outlot B 92,577 Wetland Outlot C. 165,365 Preserved woodlands ROW 62,069 1.42 acres Total 1,748,718 40.15 acres # Lot must be revised to meet the minimum 60 feet frontage on cul-de-sac. @ Exceeds the 60 feet frontage on cul-de-sac. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following three motions and adoption of the attached findings of fact and recommendation: A. "The Chanhassen City Council approves the ordinance rezoning of the property located within the Chanhassen West Business Park from Agricultural Estate District (A-2) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) incorporating the development design standards contained within this staff report based on the findings of fact attached to the report." B. "The Chanhassen City Council approves Planning go the Preliminary Plat for Chanhassen West Business Park, plans prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc., dated June 17, 2005, based on the findings of fact attached to the report and subject to the following conditions: Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 20 of 20 I. Applicant shall increase landscape plantings in the south and east property line bufferyards to meet minimum requirements. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted before final approval. 2. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to any construction activities. Fencing shall remain in place until construction is completed. 3. All trees shown as preserved on plans dated 6/17/05 shall be protected. Any trees damaged or removed shall be replaced at a rate of 2:1 diameter inches. 4. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). A Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for Water/Wetland Projects (Parts 1 and R) shall be submitted for the proposed project. The application shall include sequencing discussions and sequencing flexibility requests, if applicable. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. 5. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5afeet) shall be maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. 6. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. 7. The proposed development shall maintain existing runoff rates and meet NURP standards. Storm water calculations shall be submitted to ensure the proposed storm water pond is sized adequately for the proposed development. 8. Stable emergency overflows shall be provided for the proposed pond. on site. The emergency overflows shall be clearly labeled on the plan and a detail is needed. The emergency overflows may be stabilized with a turf re -enforcement mat or fabric and riprap. 9. Notes on the plan describing timing of temporary stabilization with Type 1 mulch and seed or erosion control blanket and seed shall be included. The notes shall include timing of stabilization as well as the rate of mulch application (2 tons per acre, disc anchored). .10. All riprap/fabric at the flared end section shall be installed within 24 hours of flared end section installation. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 21 of 21 11. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of Slope Time (Maximum time an area can Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area 10:1 to 3:1 14 days is not actively being worked.) Flatter than 10:1 21 days These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water. 12. Erosion control blanket shall be specified in the swale from the flared end section to the wetland along the west boundary of the site. The blanket specified shall adequately protect the area from designed velocity and depth of flow. The blanket and seed in the swale shall be installed within 5 days of culvert installation. Erosion control blanket is recommended for the pond slopes from around 952 to 942 contours. All blanket on the plan shall be shown as a shaded area. 13. Temporary sediment basins shall be installed prior to disturbing upslope areas. The areas of temporary sediment basins shall be labeled on the plan. A temporary outlet (e.g., a perforated riser and rock cone) shall be provided for the pond; details should be provided. Temporary basins shall be constructed in the area of the proposed permanent storm water pond, the southeast corner of the site prior to discharging to the culvert under Galpin Boulevard, and possibly in the northwest area of the site to handle water runon from the north prior to discharge to the wetland. 14. Any and all area inlets or drop inlets in paved areas shall be protected with alternate controls/Wimco details. The engineer shall research and provide alternate designs for Wimco-type inlet controls to fit the various types of inlets. 15. Additional inlet controls shall be provided for adjacent inlets on Galpin Boulevard and Street A. 16. Silt fence shall be installed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond the wetland. 17. Type 1 and Type 2 silt fence locations shall be specified on the plan. Type 2 silt fence shall be installed around all wetland areas and in the southeast corner of the site to protect the culvert under Galpin Boulevard. The silt fence shall be extended along the south side to close the gap in the silt fence. 18. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July I9, 2005 Page 22 of 22 19. The estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $413,661. 20. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase H construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval. 21. In lieu of parkland dedication and trail construction, full park fees shall be collected at the rate in force at the time of final plat for the proposed Chanhassen West Business Park. At current rates, the park fee would total $359,500 (35.95 x $10,000 per acre). 22. A demolition permit must be obtained before beginning demolition of any existing structures. 23. Retaining walls over four high must be designed by a professional engineer and a permit must be obtained prior to construction. 24. Provide a water service for Lot 6. 25. A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. 26. Fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for fire protection is required to be installed. Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction except when approved alternate methods of protection are provided. 27. The new proposed street will be required to have a street name. Submit proposed street name to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval. 2$: No burning permits will be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. 29. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed load of fire apparatus and shall be surfaced so as to provide all weather driving capabilities. Pursuant to Minnesota Fire code Section 503.2.3. 30. Temporary street signs shall be installed on street intersections when construction of a new roadway allows passage be vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota fire code Section 501.4. 31. Prior to final platting, storm sewer design data will need to be submitted for staff review. Depending on the size of the drainage area, additional catch basins may be required at that time. The storm sewer will have to be designed for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility easements will need to be dedicated on the final plat over the public Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 23 of 23 storm drainage system including storm water ponds, drainage swales, emergency overflows, access routes for maintenance, over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, and buffer areas used as PVC. The minimum easement width shall be 20 feet wide. 32. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. 33. Private utility easements are required for the sanitary sewer and water lines that serve Lot 4 but go through Lot 5. 34. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. 35.On the site plan: a. Revise the cul-de-sac pavement radius to 48 feet. b. Revise the parking driveway aisle from 24 feet to 26 feet. wide. c. Revise the public street width from 32 feet to 36 feet wide. d. Increase the full access width off Galpin Boulevard to 44 feet and create three lane access. e. Shift Lots 1 and 8 easterly access further toward the west and realign the across each other. L Show at least one, 6-foot wide, side walk along the public street. g. Show the access off Galpin Boulevard turning curb radius. h. Realign lot 5 access perpendicular to the shared driveway. i. Show street lights. j. Show handicap parks and ramps. 36.On the grading plan: a. Extend silt fence type between the storm pond and Outlot A. Silt fence Type 11 .must be used adjacent to wetlands and storm pond. b. .Revise contour lines to match 3:1 maximum slope and tie the proposed contour lines with the existing contours for Lots 4, 5, south of Lot 2 and northeast of Lot 1. c. Show the proposed contour lines for Lot 6. d. Show all retaining walls top and bottom elevations. e. Show all emergency overflows (EOF). The EOF must be 13 lower than the adjacent lowest floor. f. Revise Lot 6 parking slope to 0.7% minimum. g. Add a note to remove any existing structure and access off Galpin Boulevard and all disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. h. Show 75-foot minimum construction rock entrance. i. No retaining walls structure is allowed within public street and/or public utility easements, revise accordingly. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 24 of 24 j. Show 20-foot utility easement for the storm sewer between Lots 2 and 3 37.On the utility plans: a. Show all existing and proposed drainage and utility easements. b. Show the proposed sanitary and storm sewer stubs inverts. c. Add storm sewer schedule. d. Public storm sewer pipe type must be RCP and 15-inch minimum diameter. e. The last street accessible storm manhole (STMH#2) must be built with a sump. f Revise sanitary sewer pipe from DIP to PVC-C900. g. On the utility profile show all sewer and pipe crossings. h. Minimum vertical separation must be 18 inches between watermain and sewer. i. Call out watermain fittings 38. Any retaining wall over four feet in height must be designed by a registered Civil Engineer in the state of Minnesota with an approved safety fence on top of it. Also, it will require a building permit from the Building Department. 39. Add the following City of Chanhassen Detail Plate Nos. 1002, 2109, 2110 2204, 3104, 3109, 5201, 5205, 5214 and 5215. 40. Prior to final plat approval, a professional civil engineer registered in the state of Minnesota must sign all plans. 41. All of the ponds are required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1. bench at the NWL. 42. Cross -access easements for the shared driveway accesses must be obtained and recorded against the lots for each of the entrance drives. 43. Any off -site grading will require easements from the appropriate property owner. 44. Public utility improvements will be required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required at the time of final platting. The applicant will also be required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. The applicant must be aware that all public utility improvements will require a preconstruction meeting before building permit. issuance. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. 45. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes and traffic control plans. The applicant should be aware that any off -site grading will require an easement from the Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 25 of 25 appropriate property owner. 46. All private streets are required to have 24-foot wide paved streets from back -of -curb to back - of -curb, be built to a 7-ton design and contained within a 40-foot wide private easement. At the completion of the project, the developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 7-ton design. 47. Six-foot wide sidewalks are required. 48. All plans must be signed by a registered engineer in the state of Minnesota. - 49. All of the proposed building pads must have a rear yard elevation at least three feet above the IIWL of the adjacent ponds. 50. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's Building Department. 51. Comply with Carver County memo dated June 28, 2005 and revise the plans accordingly. 52. Revise plan sheet size to 24 x 36 using scale 50. 53. The developer shall either dedicate Outlot C to the City for open space purposes or dedicate a conservation easement over Outlot C. 54. The applicant shall work with staff to resolve any drainage issues with Lot 2 in Trotters Ridge." C. "The Chanhassen City Council approves the Wetland Alteration Permit to fill and alter wetlands within the development, plans prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc., dated June 17, 2005, subject to the following conditions:' 1. A no loss determination shall be completed for Basin F 31-34. 2. Exemption requests shall be completed for Basins F 51-80 N, Basin F 91-97 and Wetland A. 3. Wetland replacement shall occur in a planner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). A Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for Water/Wetland Projects (Parts I and.11) shall be submitted for the proposed project. The application shall include sequencing discussions and sequencing flexibility requests, if applicable. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. 4. A five-year wetland replacement monitoring plan shall be submitted. The replacement monitoring plan shall include a detailed management plan for invasive non-native species, particularly purple loosestrife and reed canary grass. The plans shall show fixed photo Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 26 of 26 monitoring points for the rep lacement.wetland. The applicant shall provide proof of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland. 5. Several corrections must be made to the Wetland Mitigation Plan (sheet 10 of 13): a. Wetland A is shown as an impact area. Upon finalization of exemption paperwork, mitigation will not be required for this wetland; b. Wetland C (Basin F 87-90) is 0.05 acres in area; and c. Wetland D (Basin F 81-86) is 0.09 acres in area. 6. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. 7. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. 8. Drainage and utility easements a minimum of 20 feet in width shall be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used as PVC and storm water ponds. 9. Silt fence shall be installed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond the wetland. 10. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase 11 construction permit), Minnesota Department. of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval" ATTACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact. 2. Development Review Application. 3. Reduced Copy Existing Conditions. 4. Reduced Copy Preliminary Plat. 5. Reduced Copy Preliminary Site Plan. 6. Reduced Copy Wetland Mitigation Plan. 7. Reduced Copy Concept Landscape Plan. 8. Memo from Bill Weckman (Carver County) to Robert Generous dated 6128105. 9. Letter from Pete May (Sprint) to Robert Generous dated 6/23/05. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 27 of 27 10. Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Mailing. 9:Vlan12005 planning cam\05-23 chanhassm west business parMstaff report prelin iaary pud.doc j z�-=- m Q� 0 ti r� NEWDOC 0 0 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER. &. HENNEPIN COUNTIES NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING' CASE NO.05-23 NOTICEIS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning! Commission will hold a public', hearing on Tuesday, July 19, 2005, a( j j 7.00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in Chanhassen City .Ball, 7700 Markel Blvd. The purpose of this hearing is to consider a request for Rezoning o; ! property from Agricultural Estate' District %2) to Planned Unit Development (PUD), PreliminaryPla# '"Approval, and Wetland .Alteration Permit or) property located on th4 northwestcorner ofthe intersectiono Lyman Boulevard and Galpir� Boulevard — Chanhassen Wesf BusinessPark. Applicant: EdenTraee Corporation. A plan showing the location of the Proposal is available forpublierevievt at City Hall during regular business hours. All interested persons area invited to attend this public hearing I andes ro theiropinionswithrespect to p posaL Robert Generous, Senior Planner Email: Phone: 952227• 1131 (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on Thursday. July 7, 2005; No, 4472) _AP Affidavit of Publication Southwest Suburban Publishing State of Minnesota) )SS. County of Carver ) Laurie A. Hartmann, being duly sworn, on oath says that she is the publisher or the authorized agent of the publisher of the newspapers known as the Chaska Herald and the Chanhassen Vil- lager and has full knowledge of the facts herein stated as follows: (A) These newspapers have complied with the requirements constituting qualification as a legal newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331A.02, 331 A.07, and other applicable laws, as amended. (B) The printed public notice that is attached to this Affidavit and identified as No. was published on the date or dates and in the newspaper stated in the attached Notice and said Notice is hereby incorporated as part of this Affidavit. Said notice was cut from the columns of the newspaper specified. Printed below is a copy of the lower case alphabet from A to Z, both inclusive, and is hereby acknowledged as being the kind and size of type used in the composition and publication of the Notice: abcdefghijkhnnopgrstuvwxyz Laurie A. Hartmann Subscribed and sworn before me on this�6. day of 2005 Notary Public F(97S Pi JC-IC.4WA Ca� Ej=31,2010 RATE INFORMATION Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users for comparable space.... $22.00 per column inch Maximum rate allowed by law for the above matter..... ........................... $22.00 per column inch Rate actually charged for the above matter ............................................... $11.18 per column inch SCANNED ■ CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER & HENNEPIN COUNTIES NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING CASE NO.05-23 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, July 19, 2005, at 7:00.p.m. in the Council Chambers in Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Blvd. The purpose of this hearing is to consider a request for Rezoning of property from Agricultural Estate District (A-2) to Planned Unit Development (PUD), Preliminary Plat Approval, and Wetland Alteration Permit on property located on the northwest comer of the intersection of Lyman Boulevard and Galpin Boulevard — Chanhassen West Business Park. Applicant: Eden Trace Corporation. A plan showing the location of the proposal is available for public review at City Hall during regular business hours. All interested persons are invited to attend this public hearing and express their opinions with respect to this proposal. Robert Generous, Senior Planner Email: bgenerous@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Phone: 952-227-1.131 (Publish in the Chanhassen Villager on July 7, 2005) SCANNED Carver County Wager Management— Department of Planning & Zoning Government rft--Adri� 13JUM 600 Eat 4" Street Chaska, Mhxsota 55318 Phone: (952)361.1820 Fax: (952)361-1828 ywwd.eo.canwmn.wAvater Memo To: Pat Minger From: Paul Moline, Carver County Water Management Date: 10/14/2005 Re: Chanhassen West Business park County Water Project WP20050038 CC. Lori Haak, City of Chanhassen Jerry Backman, Schoell-Madson Aaron Mlynek, Carver SWCD Robert Generous, City of Chanhassen Enclosures: Carver County Water Management has approved the Chanhassen West Business Park project in the City of Chanhassen for initial grading with the following conditions. If construction commences prior to the information being submitted, these conditions need to be addressed by Oct 21, 2005 or construction may be hafted. Stormwater Issues: 1. Downstream capacity of the southwest wetland (Outlot A) is needed. 2. Rainwater Gardensllnfiftration - Details need to be amended to address: i. Remove the sock from the draintile in the rainwater garden typical detail. The sock is not needed as the trench itself is wrapped with geotextile. 2. The draintile in the typical detail is shown as extending only about 1/3 the distance of the bottom of the rainwater garden. The draintile should extend the entire distance of the bottom of the rainwater garden. 3. Elevations of the trench bottom, layers of rock, and sand / compost / organic mix, invert of the draintile in relation to the outlet invert elevation and NWL/ HWL of each system and stormwater basins is needed. 4. Detail of filtration shelf needs to be specific to the site application. The detail used is a general template from Carver County meant to be a guide and not for construction. Erosion and Sediment Control: (please contact Aaron Mlynek at the Carver SWCD at 952.442.5101 for questions or assistance on this section) Sediment Control 1. It is unclear when the temporary sediment outlets will be used and when the permanent outlets will be used. In the plan it states that IF the permanent outlet is not installed a temporary outlet will be needed. Once the permanent outlet is installed, the pond can no longer be used as a temporary sediment basin. The temporary perforated outlets must be installed with the excavation of the temporary basins. The basins must be excavated prior to exposing upslope areas which shed water to the basin locations. Plans sheets should be amended to reflect this. Generous, Bob From: Mlynek, Aaron - Waconia, MN [aaron.mlynek@mn.nacdnet.net] Sent: Friday, October 14, 2005 3:44 PM To: Jared Jones Cc: pmoline@co.carver.rnn.us; Generous, Bob Subject: RE: Chanhassen West Jared: I have the following comments and requests for the Chanhassen West development. Please consider the following: Sediment Control I. It is unclear when the temporary sediment outlets will be used and when the permanent outlets will be used. In the plan it states that IF the permanent outlet is not installed a temporary outlet.will be needed. Once the permanent outlet is installed, the pond can no longer be used as a temporary sediment basin. The temporary perforated outlets must be installed with the excavation of the temporary basins. The basins must be excavated prior to exposing upslope areas which shed water to the basin locations. Rainwater Garden / Filtration Areas 1. Remove the sock from the draintile in the rainwater garden typical. detail. The sock is not needed as the trench itself is wrapped with geotextile. 2. The draintile in the typical detail is shown as extending only about 1/3 the distance of the bottom of the rainwater garden. The draintile should extend the entire distance of the bottom of the rainwater garden. I a 3. Elevations of the trench bottom, layers of rock, and sand / compost / organic mix, invert of the draintile in relation to the outlet invert elevation and NWL / HWL of each system and stormwater basins is needed. 4. Detail of filtration shelf needs to be specific to the site application. The detail used is a general template from Carver County meant to be a guide and not for construction. If there are any questions or if clarification is needed please give me a call. Aaron Mlynek, CPESC Urban Conservation Technician Carver Soil and Water Conservation District 219 East Frontage Road Waconia, MN 55387 (P): 952-442-5101 (F): 952-442-5497 (C): 952-393-1145 ----Original Message- --- From: Jared Jones[mailto:jaredj@schoellmadson.com] Sent: Friday, October 14, 2005 9:42 AM To: Mlynek, Aaron - Waconia, MN Subject: RE: Chanhassen West Aaron, Here you go, thank you very much for your help. Let me know if there's anything else we can do for you. We really appreciate it! Jared Jones, E.I.T. Schoell & Madson, Inc. 10580 Wayzata Blvd., Suite I Minnetonka, MN 55305-1525 1 www.schoellmadson.com Direct: 952-847-9608 General: 952-546-7601 Fax: 952-546-9065 "Creatively Designing Tomorrow' ---original Message ----- From: Mlynek, Aaron - Waconia, MN (mailto:aaron.mlynek@mn.nacdnet..net:I Sent: Friday, October 14, 2005 9:22 AM To: Jared Jones Subject: RE: Chanhassen West Jared, Thanks for sending over the SWPPP and grading plan. I also need pages 13, 14, 15 of the plan. Could .you please send them over ASAP? Thanks. Aaron Mlynek, CPESC Urban Conservation Technician Carver Soil and Water Conservation District 219 East Frontage Road Waconia, MN 55387 (P) : 952-442-5101 (F): 952-442-5497 (C): 952-393-1146 -----Original Message ----- From: Jared Jones(mailto:jaredj0schoellmadson.com) Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 4:35 PM To: Mlynek, Aaron - Waconia, MN Subject: Chanhassen West Aaron, Attached is our current grading plan a SWPPP for Chanhassen West Business Park. Please let me know if you need anything else, or have any comments, and I'll address them as soon as possible. Thank you very much for your assistance, we really appreciate it! Jared Jones, E.I.T. Schoell. & Madson, Inc. ' 10580 Wayzata Blvd., Suite 1 Minnetonka, MN 55305-1525 www.schoellmadson.com Direct: 952-847-.9608 General.: 952-546-7601. Fax: .952-.546-9065 'Creatively Designing Tomorrow• <<6-Grading-Layout1.PDF» <<19-SWPPP-Layout1.PDF>> 2 Carver County Water Management— Departlnento>i Planning &Zoning Ga�CertV—Adr on Mang 600 Dlif Sreet Chaska, M'mesota 55318 Phone: (952)361-1820 Fax: (952)361-18W www.oc.caftw mri.ushwater Memo To: Pat Minger From: Paul Moline, Carver County Water Management Date: 10/6/2005 Re: Chanhassen West Business park County Water Project WP20050038 CC. Lori Haak, City of Chanhassen Jerry Backman, Schoell-Madson Aaron Mlynek, Carver SWCD Robert Generous, City of Chanhassen Enclosures: Carver County Water Management has received (9/26) plans (dated 9/20/05), hydrologic calculations (dated 9/22/05) for the Chanhassen West Business Park project in the City of Chanhassen. The following comments include previous comments which were not addressed and revised comments by the County, arid Wenck Associates, SWCD Comments will be forthcoming. These comments need to be addressed prior to construction activity. Stormwater Issues: 1. Downstream capacity of the southwest wetland (Outlot A) should be submitted. 2. The outlet of the northwest wetland (Outlot B) should be submitted. 3. Rainwater Gardenshnfiltration -.Additional details are needed including: • Infiltration/filtration calculations provided show 6,611 cubic feet of treatment. However the 20.18 acres of impervious given in the HydroCAD calculations for Subwatershed 1 S requires 22,400 cubic feet of treatment. Therefore only 29% of required volume is provided. Please verify. I. TREATMENT OPTION - a filtration shelf on the pond with 6 inches of drawdown would provide an additional 15,000 cfs and allow the site to meet the rules. • Rock trench should be added to detail below the Soil mixture specified on plans. This can be done with or without draintile in order to provide more retention/storage. Draintile is recommended. • Timing of installation (after contributing area is stabilized). Show on Implementation Sequence Notes. • To reduce ini#ial degradation of basins, It is recommended plugs, shrubs and grasses are used in addition to the `rainwater garden seed mix'. Did not find on Landscape Plan Notes ■ Pretreatment, or forebay that has easy access is recommended in the raingarden for maintenance. Erosion and Sediment Control: (please contact Aaron Mlynek at the Carver SWCD at 952.442.5101 for questions or assistance on this section) Erosion Control 1. Rip rap or turf reinforcement map should be placed at the discharge from the pond in Outlot A and the stormsewer inlet in the northwest comer to the NWL of the wetland. Energy dissipation is needed to protect the wetland from scour. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS WILL BE FORWARDED FROM THE CARVER SWCD. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. 9 - _ .. � � •`pp { ry��' X � S b� may. �_� - P wrrp - ... s Aw &K..rk e. ...-+►`iiltc. Y�' e� j WT 36, ✓ rq��:a��af r'`iy^a • ,'ate t r e�,y .'R $#f f �•e <1'<''` c .r R�: 4 I;_ -1� !� . . . I - w��.4 +Ln' o gy.� ;.� . • „ _�.- i � rap � • @tC J* a1P�: .i *. a �'.�9 �t��'i� " �r �T • :� � i:': �14 ' a. •_ a n - �'.. .��1 �:i�: � �® d� ��e.. 4 • t`�F...'�'., � •8'•. -.aR } n� 4 ,:a ••,a .,.�:" � a .`*♦�"- Chanhassen West Business Park Traffic info. Page 1 of 2 Generous, Bob From: Oehme, Paul Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 3:17 PM To: Generous, Bob Subject: FW: Chanhassen West Business Park Traffic info. Here is your copy. Paul Oehme, P.E. Director of Public Works 10ty Engineer City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Ph. # 952-227-1169 Fax. # 952-227-1170 From: Oehme, Paul Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 1 49 PM To: Aanenson, Kate; Gerhardt, Todd; Morris, Alyson Subject: FW: Chanhassen West Business Park Traffic info. From: Roger Gustafson[mailto:rgustafs@co.carver.mn.us] Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 11:47 AM To: Oehme, Paul Subject: RE: Chanhassen West Business Park Traffic info. Paul, The traffic study you reference in the email that follows has been reviewed. Carver County does not take issue with the conclusions and recommendations contained in the 8/15/05 memo from Mike Spack regarding Chanhassen West Business Park access. Mr. Spack's conclusion that "the right -out is not recommended" on Lyman Boulevard is accepted by Carver County. Mr. Spack's conclusion that "the right-in,access is not recommended" on Lyman Boulevard is accepted by Carver County. As stated in my email to you dated 814l05, "access to Chanhassen West Business Park shall be at Galpin Boulevard as depicted in the materials presented to Carver County by the City." Roger M. Gustafson, P.E. Carver County Engineer 11360 Highway 212 West P.O. Box 300 Cologne, MN 55322-0300 952-466-5206 (direct) 952-466-5200 (general) 8/22/2005 Generous, Bob From: Laurie Hernandez [Iaurieh@usintemet.com] Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2005 9:35 PM To: Generous, Bob Subject: Trotter's Ridge Development Bob, I have not been able to make the meetings regarding the proposed development behind our neighborhood yet would like to voice my concerns. I was told by city officials that the land behind our home was agricultural guided toward light industrial. Despite the fact that the proposed development would allow industrial, I am supportive of the plan and specifically the placement of Outlot C (which does not disturb the wetlands behind our home). I have photographed the wildlife in the area and would hope the city could designate Outlot C as a conservation .lot. it is home to deer, fox, wild turkey, pheasant, muskrat, raccoon and numerous bird species. Recently, I heard the residents of an adjacent neighborhood would like to modify the proposed development to remove more trees and move Outlot C 150 feet. I hope the city takes into consideration we are the most directly and permanently affected by any increase in the size of Bldg. 5 and removal of trees from Outlot C. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Laurie Hernandez 2451 Bridle Creek Trail Chanhassen WestBusiness Park Traffic info. Page 2 of 2 952-466.5223 (office fax) 'The unauthorized disclosure or interceptions of a -mail is a federal crime. See 18U.S.CSEC.2517(4). This e-mail is intended only for the use of those whom it is addressed and may contain information which is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under the law. If you have received this e-mail in error, do not distribute or copy it. Return it immediately to the sender with attachments, if any. and notify the sender by telephone.' -----Original Message ---- From: Oehme, Paul(mailto:poehme@ci.chanhassen.mn.usj Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 9:25 AM To: Roger Gustafson Subject: Chanhassen West Business Park Traffic info. Roger, Please review the attached traffic study and comment. We would like a final determination from the County for access from Lyman. Please send me a letter or email with the County's position at your earliest convenience. Our background for this item is due Wednesday and I would like to include your respond in the packet if possible. «Chan West Access Memo.pdf» Thank you for your time and consideration. Paul Oehme, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen. MN 55317 Ph. # 952-227.1169 Pax. # 952-227-1170 8/22/2005 Page I of 1 Generous, Bob From: Lu Ann Sidney [LASidney@msn.com] Sent: Thursday, August 11, 200510:44 AM To: rgustatson@co.carver.mn.us Cc: bweckman@co.carver.mn.us; Oehme, Paul; Generous, Bob; Aanenson, Kate Subject: Chanhassen West Business Park Proposed Access on Lyman Blvd. Dear Mr. Gustafson: I am writing you about the proposed additional access to the Chanhassen West Business Park. This item is before the Chanhassen City Council and Council directed Staff to investigate a second access point to the development on Lyman Blvd. The current plan calls for a single entrance on Galpin Blvd. With the current configuration, the PUD for the development allows for substantial tree preservation and less intense use near the north property line which abuts a residential neighborhood, 'Trotters Ridge. With a second entrance, a right-in/right-out on Lyman, the plan would be significantly disrupted and we would be negatively impacted as a result. Many mature oak trees near our house would be removed, for example, to permit building sizes to increase to compensate for the space occupied by the second entrance. I would not be in favor of this consequence. I believe, too, an extra right-in/right-out access point would not gain much in the longterm, even in the short-term. When 312 goes in, I would expect traffic to be directed east and access the development from the east. The west right -out of the development on Lyman would likely not be used. Traffic would likely go to 312, not to Hwy. 41. I also think the addition of a second entrance would cost too much for the benefit and if it were to be done at all, should be built as part of the upgrade of this particular section of Lyman Blvd. I also believe the development is too small to merit two entrances and that the turns that would result within the development would be too sharp for semi trailer trucks. In summary, we have a plan before the Chanhassen City Council that meets ordinance and complies with the Comprehensive Plan that I do not want disrupted, creating negative consequences for the residential neighborhood on the north side of the property. Thank you for your input and attention to this matter as it. goes forward again to the Chanhassen City Council. Sincerely, Lu Ann Sidney 2431 Bridle Creek Trail Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 474-3835 66, 8/11/2005 Page 1 of I Generous, Bob From: Lu Ann Sidney [LASidney@msn.com] Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 7:59 AM To: City Council Cc: Generous, Bob Subject: Chanhassen West Business Park Dear Mayor Furlong and City Council Members: My wife and I live at 2431 Bridle Creek Trail, Lot 5 in the Trotters Ridge neighborhood. We are writing to you about the proposed Chanhassen West Business Park development, which will be considered at the August 8 City Council meeting. While we do not oppose the development of the land behind our house we have some specific concerns we ask that you seriously consider as you make your decision. To maintain the livability and quality of life for which we chose Chanhassen and to provide a satisfactory transition between the neighboring residential and industrial areas, we ask that you include the following conditions and restrictions in the preliminary plat for this PUD: • To protect the large white oak (42" diameter trunk, 60' crown) near the lot line between our property and Outlot C, locate barrier fencing in Outlot C no closer than 10 feet beyond the drip line of the tree. Jill Sinclair visited our house on July 21 and we placed some stakes at the suggested location for the barrier fencing. • Also, to protect against disturbance of the roots of this tree, do not extend the west end of the berm along the northeast property line beyond Lot 4 of Trotters Ridge. • Designate Outlot C as a permanent conservation easement, precluding any future development or change of permitted uses. • Restrict the heights of Buildings 5 and 6. We ask that Building 6 not exceed one story plus parapet for screening rooftop equipment. • Do not; allow outdoor paging/speaker systems. • Limit hours of operation of businesses to 2 shifts. - • Do not allow lighted signage. • Require minimally invasive lighting on the north sides of Buildings 5 and 6. We look forward to the upcoming City Council meeting and would like to have a chance to address the Council briefly regarding this proposed development and the need for suitable transition and buffering between these very different "neighbors." Thank you for your careful consideration of our concerns and those of our neighbors. Respectfully submitted, Peter and LuAnn Sidney 2431 Bridle Creek Trail 952-474-3835 lasidneyQmsn.com 8/4/2005 Page M Main tdenti From: "Mark K. Undestad" <mundestad@centercompanies.com> To: -Sarah Dale- <ss.dale@worldnet.att.neth Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 4:00 PM Subject: RE: Chanhassen West Business Park Hi Sarah, Thank you for your input into the landscaping designs and berming. We are in the process of increasing our trees in the area you are talking about. We will also design in a berm area between you and building 5. The berms need to be random and undulating in order to keep the plant. material healthy. Straight flat top berms do not allow water to stay up top long enough for the plants. We would agree to leave this area wild so it blends better with the wetlands. Also, if you have any special request tree types let us know (we can't put every tree type In but well try) otherwise our landscape designer will pick them and mix things up. We are trying to make everyone happy but we realize that's not reality. We are doing our best. Thanks again for your input. If you have any other questionsor comments please give me a call. Mark Undestad 952-361-0722 phone 952-36t-0723 fax From: Sarah Dale [maitto:ss.daleQ�woridnetamnet] Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 11:07 AM To: mundestad@centencompanies.com Subject: Chanhassen West Business Paris Importance: High Mark, I am a resident of Trotters Ridge subdivision, Our backyards -and those of my neighbors- will look out on Outlot B and Building 5 of your proposed Chanhassen West Business Park. 1 understand from LuAnn that you are currently revising your landscaping plan. She encouraged me to contact you to discuss our concerns. Those of us at the back of the subdivision have requested that you buld a berm and plant trees between the wetland and the new building so that we do not have a direct view of the back of building 5 and so that any noise that accompanies the buildings use would be blocked. We Would be happy to have the berm left natural because our area of the subdivision is a route for wildlife and we world fike to see that traffic remain. Ben Indicated at the planning commission meeting July 19 that you would have no trouble with the berm and increasing the amount of trees in this area of the development to accomodate our wishes, My question is is that included in the revised landscaping plan you are undertaking. And if not, could you please Include it. I left you a long voice mail on Monday, but thought perhaps this would be a more efficient way to communicate, Please feel free to respond either by e-mail or phone. Thank you in advance for your attention. Sarah Sturmon Dale ss_da le @—m rid noLa tt. n et 952-448-W4 2487 Bridle Creek Trail Chanhassen. MN SS317 7/26/2005 i � • NEWDOC z.� m� EMMME! + ' r NEWDOC i► r r i • i � f RECEIVE® July 25, 2005 JUL 2 t 2005 W MY Y OF CHWASSEN Mayor Tom Furlong Council Member Bethany Tjornhom Council Member Steve Labatt Council Member Brian Lundquist Council Member Craig Peterson Chanhassen City Hall Chanhassen, MN Mayor Furlong and members of City Council, We are writing to you in regard to the proposed Chanhassen West Business Park slated for the northwest corner of Galpin and Lyman Boulevards. Following the meeting with the city planning commission on July 19, we are concerned that none of our issues regarding the north west comer of the developmentwere addressed. Chiefly, we are concerned about the lack of specific restrictions on Building 5 within the business park according to the proposed plan. As you can see from the enclosed photographs, our homes will be directly impacted by Building 5. While the plan calls for a wetland and buffer of 200 feet in Outlot B, that area.is simply grass. As such, it will not provide any visual relief from a building that can be as high as 40 feet tall under the current proposed plan. In an ideal world, we would see no development. Butwe realize that is unlikely. As a compromise, though, we would suggest that restrictions of height, use and design be put on buildings 5 & 6 that would make them more in keeping with the new office buildings on Highway 5 near Coulter Blvd. That would still allow more industrial design and uses on the rest of the property but also allow adequate, planned transition from a high -quality residential neighborhood to those uses. To that end, we are asking that : *The developer be required to build a berm and plant- it with sufficient trees to help visually r separate our homes from the proposed Building 5 and to prevent noise pollution from unnecessarily spilling over into our lives. Our thought is that this berm would remain a natural area to help encourage the wildlife that'frequents our yards to remain. We have purposely left some of our property in a natural state to encourage wildlife traffic and to improve water quality for the adjacent wetlands. *We are also asking that the height of Building 5 be reduced to a more appropriate level. (We believe the planning commission has recommended that Building 6 which directly abuts the entrance properties to our subdivision be not more than 16 feet, including parapets. While we believe Building 5 can be slightly taller because of distance, we do not believe a 40-foot building is appropriate. We would recommend a more appropriate height of not more than 25 feet, including parapets.} *We would also like to see limitations on the designs of the Buildings 5 & 6. As mentioned r ` previously, our thought is that these buildings on the north side of the developmentco-aUbe made of materials appropriate to provide a transition between our residential neighborhood and the other six buildings on the site. Their uses should also be restricted to provide a transition. *As we and the rest of the Trotter's Ridge neighborhood have already expressed, we would also like to see restrictions on outdoor storage, jighting and outside speakers to minimize what, we see and hear. We see nothing of the current business operation on the site and would like that to remain true when more businesses are constructed. At the planning commission meeting, the developer indicated he had. no problem with construction of a berm and planting more trees on Outlot .B. But it was not included in the restrictions recommended for approval by the planning commission. We would like to see it included. We invite you to come visit our homes and see for yourself how our quality of life is going to be impacted by the proposed development. We chose to reside in Chanhassen because of the quality of city/country life that it offered. We are only asking that the quality be maintained. Much of our concern on this project stems from the fact that what we are looking at is theoretical and we find ourselves at the mercy of the developer waiting for the actual details to fall into place. The buildings as currently designed and placed are projections only. What comes in could 'be quite different from what is on the plan. That is why we feel it is necessary NOW to place appropriate limitations and restrictions so that we cannot be surprised by what is eventually erected. We are simply asking that what is developed be a good neighbor. While we understand the need for Chanhassen to encourage an industrial tax base, we do not feel it should be at the expense of voting, tax -paying residents whose property values could well be reduced by the close proximity of even more intrusive, industrial neighbors than we already have from the city of Chaska. As one of the planning commissioners put it, we are being made into a fault line where industrial and residential uses in Chanhassen, collide. And. in our experience, earthquakes are not beneficial to anyone involved. Steve & Sarah. Dale Tom & Marcia Kladek Ron & Jeanne Lindberg 2487 Bridle Creek Trail 2491 Bridle Creek Trail 2480 Bridle Creek Trail 952-448-5574 952-448-4777 = 952-368-3162 Dan & Shelley Luna 2483 Bridle Creek Trail 952-484-7789 Tom & JoEllen Radermacher 2479 Bridle Creek Trail 952-448-3222 Jeff & Hannah Cromett Tim & Karla Cahlander 2471 Bridle Creek Trail 2495 Bridle Creek Trail 952-448-9824 952-361-0778 Craig & Nina Wallestad 2475 Bridle Creek Trail 952-448-6331 View of site from 2483 Bridle Creek Trail fir" � - -- _. • i U-Nia",M FPMl-,t!Lv-, 1 h t } u• ' fF ham" � �.'y-"+-Ls Y.'. tiJ' YJ r� it-•Y .�', Y�. Z� �s �s �s \j \ • 1 S r � NEWDOC II 7 r- r- MEMORANDUM CITY OF CHEASSENTO: Bob Generous, Senior Planner 7700MUM Wevard FROM: MakSweidan,Engineer N POBox 147 Cam, MN 55317 DATE: September 12, 2005 Administration Ptw eW227.1100 Fax952227.1110 SUBJ: Final Plat Review for Chanhassen West Business Park Addition - Project No. 05-15 Building Inspections ftm%2.227.1180 Fax952227.1190 Upon review of the plans dated September 6, 2005, prepared by Schoell & Engineering Madson, Inc., I offer the following comments: Plsor %2.227.1160 Fax952227.1170 GRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL Finance ftm962.227.1140 The existing site is about 44.75 acres in size with scattered wetlands. In addition, Far952227.1110 there are three existing buildings on the property which will have to be razed prior Park & Recreation to any grading operations. The current plans show buildings with proposed floor Owe 952227,1120 elevations from 961-966. The applicant is now proposing to grade about 83% of F'=%2.227.1110 the site for the new building pads, storm pond, and a proposed street ending with R eat On 2310 Ww Bou'evard a cul-de-sac. The current plans propose eight lots located along the proposed Fhor W.227.1400 street and cul-de-sac. Fax 952,227.1404 There are a few areas of concern with the grading plan. Staff would like to see Planning & Natural Resources the applicant do abetter job of matching in with the existing topography of the PhA: site and maintain a side slope of 3:1 maximum. The existing ,site drains toward Fm%2227,1110 the existing three wetlands on the northwesterly and southwesterly comers and Public works east side of the parcel. At these elevations, stormwater from the buildings and 1591MRoad parking lots will drain toward the proposed catch basins and be conveyed via Hvm952.227.1300 storm sewer system to the proposed storm pond on the southwesterly corner of the Fax952227.1310 parcel. The pored will treat the water before discharging it to the adjacent Senior Center wetland, Pt 952227,1125 €ax952227.1110 Staff recommends that the swale west of Lot 4 be filled in to reduce the height of Web site or eliminate the need for a retaining wall at this location. In order to do this, the developer must ensure that the off -site run off from the west is diverted. All of the ponds are required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. The applicant is required to meet the existing site runoff rates for a 10-year and 100- year, 24-hour storm event. Storm sewer sizing calculations must be submitted at the time of final plat application. The storm sewer must be sized for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility easements must be dedicated on the final plat over the public storm drainage system including ponds, drainage swales, The City of Chanhassen • Agrow°a:g co rsrxmity with cieaaa lakes, Qu 4r xhools, a c3aoning dowiown, thriving bAlnmses, wWs q trails, and beautiful parks. A Beat place to We. work, and play. Bob Generous September 12, 2005 Page 2 and wetlands up to the 1.00-year .flood level. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. The applicant must be aware that a retaining wall structure is not allowed within the public street right-of-way. Also, any retaining wall exceeding four feet in height must be designed by a registered structural engineer with approved safety fence and a building permit must be obtained. Erosion control measures and site restoration must be developed in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Staff recommends that the. City's Type II erosion control fence, which is a heavy duty silt fence, be used for the area adjacent to the existing wetlands on the north and south grading limits of the site. Type I silt fence shall be used in all other areas. In addition, tree preservation fencing must be installed at the limits of tree removal. Erosion control blankets are recommended for all of the steep 3:1 slopes with an elevation change of eight feet or more. All disturbed areas, as a result. of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. The applicant should be aware that any off --site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes. A minimum 75-foot rock construction entrance must be added to the plans at the proposed access off of Gaipin Boulevard. UTILITIES Municipal sewer and water stubs are available to the site from Galpin Boulevard on the east side of the parcel. The applicant is proposing to connect to the existing utility stubs and extend them to the proposed lots to service the site. The sanitary and watermain lines that run within the public street right-of-way and within the shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5 until the last sanitary manhole will be considered a public utility line and the remaining will be considered private utility. Additional gate valves are needed for the shaved private watermain between any two lots. Minimum 20-foot wide easements will be required over the public portion of the storm sewer lines between Lots 2 and 3. The underlying property has been previously assessed for sewer, water and street improvements and there is no remaining assessment due payable to the City. Since the developer will be responsible for extending lateral sewer and water service to the lots, the sanitary sewer and water connection charges will be waived. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. Bob Generous September, 12, 2005 Page 3 All of the utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Upon completion of the utility improvements, the utilities will be turned over to the City for maintenance and ownership. The applicant is also required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will have to be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. STREETS The proposed development lies west of Galpin Boulevard (CSAH 19) and north of Lyman Boulevard (CSAH 18), A -Minor Expander Arterials as identified on SRF Consulting Group Incorporated's Functional Classification Map. Proposed access to the site will be from Galpin Boulevard, which aligns with Stone Creek Drive, an existing local street extending east of Galpin Boulevard. Staff has researched the feasibility of moving the proposed site access from Galpin Boulevard to Lyman Boulevard in response to citizens' requests. Due to wetland conditions, any access from the site to Lyman Boulevard would be 1,000 feet west of Galpin Boulevard. Carver County has identified Lyman Boulevard as a regional east -west collector with limited access; therefore staff recommends that the access to Chanhassen West Business Park remain at the Galpin Boulevard/Stone Creek Drive intersection. This recommendation is also consistent with Section 18-57 of the City Code, which states that "access to arterial streets shall be at intervals of not less than one-fourth mile [1,320 feet] and through existing and established crossroads". The developers traffic engineer, TDI, completed an analysis of traffic and determined that right -in, right -out access from Lyman Boulevard to the site would not significantly reduce the number of vehicles using the Galpin Boulevard access. Based on TDI's findings, a right -in, right -out access on Lyman Boulevard is not proposed. SRF Consulting Group, Inc. analyzed the 2020 transportation system in conjunction with the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan. SRF's forecasted 2020 traffic volume for Galpin Boulevard was based on the 2020 Land Use Map and the construction of the new Trunk Highway 212. The proposed land use of the Chanhassen West Business Park is consistent with the 2020 land use used in SRF's traffic analysis. SRF's report does not identify a need to upgrade Galpin Boulevard by the year 2020. Right turn lanes for north and southbound traffic exist at the Galpin Boulevard intersection with Stone Creek Road and the proposed site access. The developer Bob Generous September 12, 2005 Page 4 must submit an access permit to Carver County Public Works for the proposed connection to Galpin Boulevard. As stipulated by the Assistant County Engineer, the developer must submit information on proposed turn lanes with the permit application. There is one public street proposed with the project. The street is proposed as a cul-de-sac running west of Galpin Boulevard and a private shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5. The applicant is proposing the paved streets to be 32-feet wide with a 60-foot wide right=of-way and a 46-foot cul-de-sac paved radius. The applicant must be aware that the City's standard commercial street pavement width is 36-foot wide from back -of -curb to back -of -curb and the cul-de-sac must be 48-foot in radius. Staff is fine with the 24-foot wide shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5. The developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 7-ton design. Staff has concerns of movements of truck traffic accessing off Galpin Boulevard to Lots 1 and 8 being too close. Staff recommends increasing the access width to 44 feet to create a three lane access off Galpin Boulevard and increase the turning curb radius. Also, relocate Lots' 1 and 8 easterly accesses further to the west and re -align them opposite of each other. The applicant should be aware that, in commercial districts, six-foot wide sidewalks are required and the parking driveway aisle must be 26-feet wide. Cross -access easements will be obtained for the shared driveways and recorded against the lots. RECOeMMI ENDED CONDITIONS OF FINAL PLAT APPROVAL 1. Show 20-foot utility easement for the storm sewer between Lots 2 and 3. 2. Show minimum 30-foot utility easement between Lots 4 and 5 along the private driveway from sanitary MR #6 to NM #8. 3. Approval of the final plat is contingent upon approval of final construction plans/specifications for the project along with the developer entering into a development contract with the City and supplying the necessary financial security and fees. RECOIL MENDED CONDITIONS OF CONSTRUCTION PLAN APPROVAL 1. Prior to construction commence, storm sewer design data will need to be submitted with drainage map for staff review. Depehding on the size of the drainage area, additional catch basins may be required at that time. The storm sewer will have to be designed for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility easements will need to be dedicated on the Bob Generous September 12, 2005 Page 5 final plat over the public storm drainage system including ponds, drainage swales, emergency overflows, access routes for maintenance, and wetlands up to the 100-year flood level. The minimum easement width shall be 20 feet wide. 2. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. 3. A 30-foot public utility easement is required for the sanitary sewer and water lines that serve Lot 4 and Lot 5. 4. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. 5. On the site plan: a. Revise the cul-de-sac pavement radius to 48 feet. b. Revise the parking driveway aisle from 24 feet to 26 feet wide. c. Revise the public street width from 32 feet to 36 feet wide. d. Increase the full access width off Galpin Boulevard to 44 feet and create three lane access. e. Shift Lots 1 and 8 easterly access further toward the west and realign the across each other. f. Show at least one, 6-foot wide, side walk along the public street and pedestrian ramps. g. Show the access off Galpin Boulevard turning curb radius. h. Realign Lot 5 access perpendicular to the shared driveway. 1. Show concrete driveway apron at every lot driveway access off Stone Creek Circle per Detail Plate No. 5207. j. Show handicap parking spots and ramps. 6. On the grading plan: a. Extend silt fence between the storm pond and Outlot A. Type 11 Silt fence must be used adjacent to wetlands and storm pond. b. Revise contour lines to match 3:1 maximum slope and tie the proposed contour lines with the existing contours for Lots 4 and 5 south of Lot 2 and northeast of Lot 1. c. Show the proposed contour lines forLot 6: d. Show all retaining walls top and bottom elevations. e. Show all emergency overflows (EOF). The EOF must be 1.5" lower than the a�djacent lowest floor. f. Revise Lot j&�Affing slope to 0.7% minimum. g. Add a note to remove any existing structure and access off Galpin Boulevard and Lyman Boulevard. Also, all disturbed areas, as a Bob Generous September 12, 2005 Page 6 result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. h. Show 75-foot minimum construction rock entrance. L No retaining wall structure is allowed within public street and/or public utility easements, revise accordingly. j. Show contour lines for the berm on Outlot B. 7. On the utility plans: btu Z a. Show 20-foot proposed utility easement between Lots 2 and 3. 4 b. Show minimum 30-foot utility easement between Lots 4 and 5 �e along the private driveway from sanitary MH #6 to MH #8. c. Add storm sewer schedule. e. d. Public storm sewer pipe type must be RCP and.15-inch minimum diameter. e. The last street accessible storm manhole (STMH # 2A) must be built with a sump. f. Show the proposed sanitary and storm sewer stub inverts. b g. On the utility profile, show all sewer pipe crossings. a h. Minimum vertical separation must be 18 inches between watermain and sewer. i. Call out watermain fittings. L j. Add the outlet control structure per Detail Plate No. 3109. b 8. Any retaining wall over four feet in height must be designed by a registered Civil Engineer in the state of Minnesota with an approved safety fence on top of it. Also, it will require a building permit from the Building Department. 9. Add the following City of Chanhassen latest Detail Plate Nos. 1001,1002, 1003, 2109, 2110, 2201, 2204, 3104, 2205, 3109, 5201, 5205, 5214, 5215, 5216, 5217, 5221, 5232, 5240, 5241, 5242, 5302 and 5313. 10. Prior to final plat approval, a professional civil engineer registered in the state of Minnesota must sign all plans. 11. Storm pond is required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. Submit drainage calculations for staff review before construction commences. 12. Six-foot wide sidewalks are required. 13. Any off -site grading will require easements from the appropriate property owner(s). :Bob Generous September 12, 2005 Page 7 14. Public utility improvements will be required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required at the time of final platting. The applicant will also be required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. The applicant must be aware that all public utility improvements will require a preconstruction meeting before building permit issuance. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. 15. Cross -access easements will need to be obtained and recorded against the lots for each of the entrance drives. 16. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes and traffic control plans. The applicant should be aware that any off -site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. .17. All private streets are required to have 24-foot wide paved streets from back -of -curb to back -of -curb, be built to a 7-tan design and be contained within a 40-foot wide private easement. At the completion of the project, the developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 7-ton design. 18. All plans must be signed by a registered engineer in the state of Minnesota. 19. All of the proposed house pads must have a rearyard elevation at least three feet above the HWL of the adjacent ponds. 20. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's Building Department. 21. Comply with the June 2S, 2005 Carver County memo and revise the plans accordingly. 22. Revise plan sheet size to 24 x. 36 using scale 50. c: Paul Oehme, Public Works Director/City Engineer Alyson Morris, Assistant City Engineer glen&rojectslchanwwbusparklfinaI plat reviewAx k 'w r �� • NEWDOC o'er n� i NEWDOC it 1 • 1 k 9 Y 0 MEMORANDUM *ff OF Culil1MEN TO: Bob Generous, Senior Planner 7l marketBouimd FROM: Mak Sweidan, Engineer P4 Bo�c tat 0 4n �� Charilia=MN55317 DATE: September 12, 2005 Administration ftP—,W227.1100 SUBS: Final Plat Review for Chanhassen West Business Park Addition l:a>r952227.1110 Project No. 05-15 Building Inspections fte952227.1180 17ax952227.1190 Upon review of the plans dated September 6, 2005, prepared by Schoell & Engineering Madson, Inc., I offer the following comments: Ihm 952227.1160 f=W227.1170 GRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL Finance F4t M 952.227.ita0 The existing site is about 44.75 acres in size with scattered wetlands. In addition, Fa> 95M7.iii0 there are three existing buildings on the property which will have to be razed prior Park & Recreation to any grading operations. The current plans show buildings with proposed floor fte%2227.i120 elevations from 961-966. The applicant is now proposing to grade about 83% of Fax952227.1110 the site for the new building pads, storm pond, and a proposed street ending with 23i0Cou"�a i3outzratd a cul-de-sac. The current plans propose eight lots located along the proposed Pt95222t.1400 street and eul=de-sac. Fax: 952227.104 There are a few areas of concern with the grading plan. Staff would like to see Planning & Natural Resources the applicant do a better job of matching in with _the existing topography of the Rve962227.ti30 site and maintain a side slope of 3:1 maximum. The existing site drains toward Pa952.227.itt0 the existing three wetlands on the northwesterly and southwesterly corners and Publicworh cast side of the parcel. -At these elevations, stormwater from the buildings and 159"Ift ;0ad parking lots will drain -toward the proposed catch basins and be conveyed via Pt:952.227.i3M storm sewer system to the proposed storm pond on the southwesterly corner of the Fax952.227.i3t0 parcel. The pond will treat the water before discharging it to the adjacent Senior Center wetland. Flw' %52227.1125 fa>C952.22t.i1t0 Staff recommends that the swale west of Lot 4 be filled in to reduce the height of Wert site or eliminate the need for a retaining wall at this location. In order to do this, the www.d.aeummus developer must ensure that the off -site run off from the west is diverted. All of the ponds are. required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. The applicant is required to meet the existing site runoff rates for a 10-year and 100- year, 24-hour storm event. Storm sewer sizing calculations must be submitted at the time of final plat application. The storm sewer must be. sized for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility easements must be dedicated on the final plat over the public storm drainage system including ponds, drainage swales, The City of Chanhassen •Agmw'sngcorraxooitywithclean lakes, quality sdmols,acha,mingdowntown,VffWgbuSu Ses,wsndir trails, andbeautifulparks. Agnatplace tolire,work,and play. Bob Generous September 12, 2005 Page 2 and wetlands up to the 100-year flood level. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. The applicant must be aware that a retaining wall structure is not allowed within the public street right-of-way. Also,, any retaining wall exceeding four feet in height must be designed by a registered structural engineer with approved safety fence and a building permit must be obtained. Erosion control measures and site restoration must be developed in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPIT). Staff recommends that the City's Type II erosion control fence, which is a heavy duty silt fence, be used for the area adjacent to the existing wetlands on the north and south grading limits of the site. Type I silt fence shall be used in all other areas. In addition, tree preservation fencing must be installed at the limits of tree removal. Erosion control blankets are recommended for all of the steep 3:1 slopes with an elevation change of eight feet or more. All disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. The applicant should be aware that any off -site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes. A minimum 75-foot rock construction entrance must be added to the plans at the proposed access off of Galpin Boulevard. UTILITIES Municipal sewer and water stubs are available to the site from Galpin Boulevard on the east side of the parcel. The applicant is proposing to connect to the existing utility stubs and extend them to the proposed lots to service the site. The sanitary and watermain lines that run within the public street right-of-way and within the shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5 until the last sanitary manhole will be considered a public utility line and the remaining will be considered private utility. Additional gate valves are needed for the shared private watermain between any two lots. Minimum 20-foot wide easements will be required over the public portion of the storm sewer lines between Lots 2 and 3. The underlying property has been previously assessed for sewer, water and street improvements and there.is no remaining assessment due payable to the City. Since the developer will be responsible for extending lateral sewer and water service to the lots, the sanitary sewer and water connection charges will be waived. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. Bob Generous September 12, 2005 Page 3 All of the utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Upon completion of the utility improvements, the utilities will be turned over to the City for maintenance and ownership. The applicant is also required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will have to be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed. District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. STREETS The proposed development lies west of Galpin Boulevard (CSAH 19) and north of Lyman Boulevard (CSAH 18), A -Minor Expander Arterials as identified on SRF Consulting Group Incorporated's Functional Classification Map. Upon City Council approval of the September 29, 2005 Consent. Agenda, the development is subject to the $3,600/developable acre Arterial Collector Fee. All new developments along the Lyman Boulevard corridor are subject to this fee. The proceeds of this fee will fund the reconstruction of Lyman Boulevard between Audubon Road and Powers Boulevard. The Arterial Collector Fee is calculated as follows: 40.15 acres (gross area) — 4.147 acres (area of Outlot A) — 2.125 acres (area of Outlot B) x $3,600/acre = $121NO. 80 Proposed access to the site will be from Galpin Boulevard, which aligns with Stone Creek Drive, an existing local street extending east of Galpin Boulevard. Staff has researched the feasibility of moving the proposed site access from Galpin Boulevard to Lyman Boulevard in response to citizens.' requests. Due to wetland conditions, any access from the site to Lyman Boulevard would be 1,000 feet west of Galpin Boulevard. Carver County has identified Lyman Boulevard as a regional east -west collector with limited access; therefore staff recommends that the access to Chanhassen West Business Park remain at the Galpin Boulevard/Stone Creek Drive intersection. This recommendation is also consistent with Section 18-57 of the City Code, which states that "access to arterial streets shall be at intervals of not less than one-fourth mile [1,320 feet] and through existing and established crossroads". The developer's traffic engineer, TDI, completed an analysis of traffic and determined that right -in, right -out access from Lyman Boulevard to the site would. not significantly reduce the number of vehicles using the Galpin .Boulevard access. Based on TDrs findings, a right -in, right -out access on Lyman Boulevard is not proposed. Bob Generous September 12, 2005 Page 4 SRF Consulting Group, Inc. analyzed the 2020 transportation system in conjunction with the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan. SRF's forecasted 2020 traffic volume for Galpin Boulevard was based on the 2020 Land Use Map and the construction of the new Trunk Highway 212. The proposed land use of the Chanhassen West Business Park is consistent with the 2020 land use used in SRF's traffic analysis. SRF's report does not identify a need to upgrade Galpin Boulevard by the year 2020. Right turn lanes for north and southbound traffic exist at the Galpin Boulevard intersection with Stone Creek Road and the proposed site access. The developer must submit an access permit to Carver County Public Works for the proposed connection to Galpin Boulevard. As stipulated by the Assistant County Engineer, the developer must submit information on proposed turn lanes with the permit application. There is one public street proposed with the project. The street is proposed as a cut -de -sac running west of Galpin Boulevard and aprivate shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5. The applicant is proposing the paved streets to be 32-feet wide with a 60-foot wide right-of-way and a 46-foot cul-de-sac paved radius. The applicant must be aware that the City's standard commercial street pavement width is 36-foot wide from back -of -curb to back -of -curb and the cul-de-sac must be 48-foot in radius. Staff is fine with the 24-foot wide shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5. The developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 7-ton design. Staff has concerns of movements of truck traffic accessing off Galpin Boulevard to Lots 1 and 8 being too close. Staff recommends increasing the access width to 44 feet to create a three lane access off Galpin Boulevard and increase the turning curb radius. Also, relocate Lots' 1 and 8 easterly accesses further to the west and re -align them opposite of each other. The applicant should be aware that, in commercial districts, six-foot wide sidewalks are required and the parking driveway aisle must be 26-feet wide. Cross -access easements will be obtained for the shared driveways and recorded against the lots. RECOMMENDED CONDI:T1iONS OF FINAL PLAT APPROVAL 1. Show 20-foot utility easement for the storm sewer between Lots 2 and 3. 2. Show minimum 30-foot utility easement between Lots 4 and 5 along the private driveway from sanitary MH #6 to MH #8. 3. The developer shall pay the $121,960.80 Arterial Collector Fee. Bob Generous September 12, 2005 Page 5 4. Approval of the final plat is contingent upon approval of final construction plans/specifications for the project along with the developer entering into a development contract with the City and supplying the necessary financial security and fees. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF CONSTRUCTION PLAN APPROVAL 1. Prior to construction commence, storm sewer design data will need to be submitted with drainage map for staff review. Depending on the size of the drainage area, additional catch basins may be required at that time. The storm sewer will have to be designed for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility easements will need to be dedicated on the final plat over the public storm drainage system including ponds, drainage swales, emergency overflows, access routes for maintenance, and wetlands up to the 100-year flood level. The minimum easement width shall be 20 feet wide. 2. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. 3. A 30.foot public utility easement is required for the sanitary sewer and water lines that serve Lot 4 and Lot 5. 4. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. 5. On the site plan: a. Revise the cul-de-sac pavement radius to 48 feet. b. Revise the parking driveway aisle from 24 feet to 26 feet wide. c. Revise the public street width from 32 feet to 36 feet wide. d. Increase the full access width off Galpin Boulevard to 44 feet and create three lane access. e. Shift Lots 1 and 8 easterly access further toward the west and realign the across each ether. f Show at least one, 6-foot wide, side walk along the public street and pedestrian ramps. g. Show the access off Galpin Boulevard turning curb radius. h. Realign Lot 5 access perpendicular to the shared driveway. I. Show concrete driveway apron at every lot driveway access off Stone Creek Circle per Detail Plate No. 5207. j. Show handicap parking spots and ramps. Bob Generous September 12, 2005 Page 6 6. On the grading plan: a. Extend silt fence between the storm pond and Outlot A. Type II Silt fence must be used adjacent to wetlands and storm pond. b. Revise contour lines to match 3:1 maximum slope and tie the proposed contour lines with the existing contours for Lots 4 and 5 south of Lot 2 and northeast of Lot 1. c. Show the proposed contour lines for Lot 6. d. Show all retaining walls top and bottom elevations. e. Show all emergency overflows (EOF). The EOF must be 1.5' lower than the adjacent lowest floor. f Revise Lot 6 parking slope to 0.7% minimum. g. Add a note to remove any existing structure and access off Galpin Boulevard and Lyman Boulevard. Also, all disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. h. Show 75-foot minimum construction rock entrance. i. No retaining wall structure is allowed within public street and/or public utility easements, revise accordingly. j. Show contour lines for the berm on Outlot B. 7. On the utility plans: a. Show 20-foot proposed utility easement between Lots 2 and 3. b. Show minimum 30-foot utility easement between Lots 4 and 5 along the private driveway from sanitary MH #6 to MH #8. c. Add storm sewer schedule. d. Public storm sewer pipe type must be RCP and 15-inch minimum diameter. e. The last street accessible storm manhole (STMH # 2A) must be built with a sump. f. Show the proposed sanitary and storm sewer stub inverts. g. On the utility profile, show all sewer pipe crossings. h. Minimum vertical separation must be 18 inches between watermain and sewer. i. Call out watermain fittings. j. Add the outlet control structure per Detail Plate No. 3109. 8. Any retaining wall over four feet in height must be designed by a registered Civil Engineer in the state of Minnesota with an approved safety fence on top of it. Also, it will require a building permit from the Building Department. 9. Add the following City of Chanhassen latest Detail Plate Nos. 1001, 1002, 1003, 2109, 2110, 2201, 2204, 3104, 2205, 3109, 5201, 5205, 5214, 5215, 5216, 5217, 5221, 5232, 5240, 5241, 5242, 5302 and 5313. Bob Generous September 12, 2005 Page 7 10. Prior to final plat approval, a professional civil engineer registered in the state of Minnesota must sign all plans. 11. Storm pond is required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3.1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. Submit drainage calculations for staff review before construction commences. 12. Six-foot wide sidewalks are required. 13. Any off -site grading will require easements from the appropriate property owner(s). 14. Public utility improvements will be required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required at the time of final platting. The applicant will also be required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. The applicant must be aware that all public utility improvements will require a preconstruction meeting before building permit issuance. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. 15. Cross -access easements will need to be obtained and recorded against the lots for each of the entrance drives. 16. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes and traffic control plans. The applicant should be aware that any off -site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. 17. All private streets are required to have 24-foot wide paved streets from back -of -curb to back -of -curb, be built to a 7-ton design and be contained within a 40-foot wide private easement. At the completion of the project, the developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 7-ton design. 18. All plans must be signed by a registered engineer in the state of Minnesota 19. All of the proposed house pads must have a rearyard elevation at least three feet above the HWL of the adjacent ponds. Bob Generous September 12, 2005 Page 8 20. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's Building Department. 21. Comply with the June 28, 2005 Carver County memo and revise the plans accordingly. 22. Revise plan sheet size to 24 x.3d using scale 50. c: Paul Oehme, Public Works Director/City Engineer Alyson Morris, Assistant City Engineer r,\cnglprgectskhanwesibasparklfinal plat review.&c z� 1� f r • � t 1 • Y ! NEWDOC NEWDOC • A 4 r " r 0 CITY OF CIM UMSEN 7700 Market Sou'avard F0 Box 141 { IM!"asM MN 55317 Administration RXM 952.227.1100 Fax %2227.1110' Building Inspections ttz952.227.11W fax 952221;1190 Engineering I' 952227.1160 fax 952227.1170 _ Finance R= 952-227.1140 I"ax W227.1110 Park & Recreation f1 W.227.1120 fax 952.227.1110 Naee*n Ceder 2310 Coiner Boulevard Mm 952.227.1400 fax 952.227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources Ptxxse %2227.1130 fax 952.227.1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road JUM %2.227.1300 Fax: 952.227,1310 Senior Center Ptw)e-. 962221.1125 fax 952.227.1110 Web Site wwrr. 17U1 UV- •T111` No -owl UT I TO: Bob Generous, Senior Planner FROM: Mak Sweidan, Engineer DATE: July 13, 2005 SUBJ: Preliminary Plat Review for Chanhassen West Business Park Addition - LUR No. 05-07 Upon review of the plans dated June 17, 2005, prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc., I offer the following comments: GRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL The existing site is about 44.75 acres in size with scattered wetlands. In addition, there are three existing buildings on the property which will have to be razed prior to any grading operations. The current plans show buildings with proposed floor elevations from 961-966. The applicant is now proposing to grade about 83% of the site for the new building pads, storm pond and a proposed street ending with a cul-de-sac. The current plans propose eight. lots located along the proposed street and cul-de-sac. There are a few areas of concern with the grading plan. Staff would like to see' the applicant do'a better job of matching in with the existing topography of the site and maintain a side slope of 3:1 maximum. The existing site drains toward the existing three wetlands on the northwesterly, southwesterly corners and east side of the parcel. At these elevations, stormwater from the buildings and parking lots will drain toward the proposed catch basins and be conveyed via storm sewer system to the proposed storm pond on the southwesterly corner of the parcel. The pond will treat the water before discharging it to the adjacent wetland. All-of.the ponds are required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) `standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. The applicant is required to meet the existing site runoff rates for the ,10-year and 100- year, 24-hour storm events. Storm sewer sizing calculations must be submitted at the time of final plat application. The storm sewer must be sized for. a 10-year, 24-hour storm event.- Drainage and utility easements must be dedicated on the final plat over the public storm drainage system including ponds, drainage swales, and wetlands up to the 100-year flood level. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. The City of Chanhassen 9 A growing cwrnsr rra with dean lakes, quality OnIs, a ct=a ng downtown, ttui*9 businesses, wir&q trails, and Wotiful parks; A okat place to M. work, and play. Bob Generous July 13, 2005 Page 2 The applicant must be aware that a retaining wall structure is not allowed within the public street right-of-way. Also,,any retaining wall exceeding four feet in height must be designed by a registered structural engineer, with approved safety fence and a building permit must be obtained. Erosion control measures and site restoration must be developed in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Staff recommends that the City's Type H erosion control fence, which is a heavy duty silt fence, be used for the area adjacent to the existing wetlands on the north and south grading limits of the site. Type I silt fence shall be used in all other areas. A minimum 75-foot long rock construction entrance must be shown at the entrance drive that will be utilized during construction. In addition, tree preservation fencing must be installed at the limits of tree removal. Erosion control blankets are recommended for all of the steep 3.1 slopes with an elevation change of eight feet or more. All disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. The applicant should be aware that any off. -site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes. A minimum 75-foot rock construction entrance must be added to the plans at the proposed access off of Galpin Boulevard. UTILITIES Municipal sewer and water stubs are available to the site from Galpin Boulevard on the east side of the parcel. The applicant is proposing to connect to the existing utility stubs and extend them to the proposed lots to service the site. The sanitary and watermain lines that run within the public street right-of-way and within the shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5 until the last sanitary manhole will be considered a public utility line and the remaining will be considered private utility. Additional gate valves are needed for the shared private watermain between any two lots. Minimum 20-foot wide easements will be required over the public portion of the storm sewer lines between Lots 2 and 3. The underlying property has been previously assessed for sewer, water and street improvements and there is no remaining assessment due payable to the City. Since the developer will be responsible for extending lateral sewer and water service to the lots, the sanitary sewer and water connection charges will be waived. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building.permit issuance. Bob Generous July 13, 2005 Page 3 All of the utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Upon completion of the utility improvements, the utilities will be turned over to the City for maintenance and ownership. The applicant is also required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will have to be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. STREETS The proposed development lies west of Galpin Boulevard (CSAH 19) and north of Lyman Boulevard (CSAH 18), A-Mi nor Expander Arterials as identified on SRF Consulting Group Incorporated's Functional Classification Map. Proposed access to the site will be from Galpin Boulevard, which aligns with Stone Creek Drive, an existing local street extending east of Galpin Boulevard. Staff has researched the feasibility to move the proposed site access from Galpin Boulevard to Lyman Boulevard in response to citizens' requests. Due to wetland conditions, any access from the site to Lyman Boulevard would be 1,000 feet west of Galpin Boulevard. Carver County has identified Lyman Boulevard as a regional east -west collector with limited access; therefore Staff recommends that the access to Chanhassen West Business Park remain at the Galpin Boulevard/Stone Creek Drive intersection. This recommendation is also consistent with Section 18-57 of the City Code, which states that "access to arterial streets shall be at intervals of not less than one-fourth mile (1,320 feet) and through existing and established crossroads". SRF Consulting Group, Inc. analyzed the 2020 transportation system in conjunction with the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan. SRF's forecasted 2020 traffic volume for Galpin Boulevard was based on the 2020 Land Use Map and the construction of the new Trunk Highway 212. The proposed land use of the Chanhassen West Business Park is consistent with the 2020 land use used in SRF's traffic analysis. SRF's report does not identify a need to upgrade Galpin Boulevard by the year 2020. o Right turn lanes for north and southbound traffic exist at the Galpin Boulevard intersection with Stone Creek Road and the proposed ,site access. The developer must submit an access permit to Carver County Public Works for the proposed connection to Galpin Boulevard. As stipulated by the Assistant County Engineer, the developer must submit information on proposed turn lanes with the permit application. Bob Generous July 13, 2005 Page 4 There is one public street proposed with the project. The street is proposed as a cul-de-sac running west of Galpin Boulevard and a private shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5. The applicant is proposing the paved streets to be 32-feet wide with a 60-foot wide right-of-way and a 46-foot cul-de-sac paved radius. The applicant must be aware that the City's standard commercial street pavement width is 36-foot wide from back -of -curb to back -of -curb and the cul-de-sac must. be 48-foot in radius. Staff is fine with the 24-foot wide shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5. The developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 7-ton design. Staff has concerns of movements of truck traffic accessing off Galpin Boulevard to Lots 1 and 8 being too close. Staff recommends increasing the access width to 44 feet to create a three lane access off Galpin Boulevard and increase the turning curb radius. Also, relocate Lots 1 and 8 easterly accesses further to the west and re -align them opposite of each other. The applicant should be aware that, in commercial districts, six-foot wide sidewalks are required and the parking driveway aisle must be 26-foot wide. Cross -access easements will be obtained for the shared driveways and recorded. against the lots. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Prior to final platting, storm sewer design data will need to be submitted for staff review. Depending on the size of the drainage area, additional catch basins may be required at that time. The storm sewer will have to be designed for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility easements will need to be dedicated on the final plat over the public storm drainage system including ponds, drainage swales, emergency overflows, access routes for maintenance, and wetlands up to the 100-year flood level. The minimum easement width shall be 20 feet wide. 2. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. 3. Private utility easements are required for the sanitary sewer and water lines that serve Lot 4 but go through Lot 5. 4. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. 5. On the site plan: a. Revise the cul-de-sac pavement radius to 48 feet. Bob Generous July 13, 2005 Page 5 b. Revise the parking driveway aisle from 24 feet to 26 feet wide. c. Revise the public street width from 32 feet to 36 feet wide. d. Increase the full access width off Galpin Boulevard to 44 feet and create three lane access. e. Shift Lots 1 and 8 easterly access further toward the west and realign the across each other. f. Show at least one, 6-foot wide, side walk along the public street. g. Show the access off Galpin Boulevard turning curb radius. h. Realign lot 5 access perpendicular to the shared driveway. I. Show street lights. J. Show handicap parks and ramps. 6. On the grading plan: a. Extend silt fence type between the storm pond and Outlot A. Silt fence Type II must be used adjacent to wetlands and storm pond. b. Revise contour lines to match 3:1 maximum slope and tie the proposed contour lines with the existing contours for Lots 4, 5, south of Lot 2 and northeast of Lot 1. c. Show the. proposed contour lines for Lot 6. d. Show all retaining walls top and bottom elevations. e. Show all emergency overflows (EOF). The EOF must be 1.5' lower than the adjacent lowest floor. f. Revise Lot 6 parking slope to 0.7% minimum. g. Add a note to remove any existing structure and access off Galpin Boulevard and all disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. h. Show 75-foot minimum construction rock entrance. L No retaining walls structure is allowed within public street and/or public utility easements, revise accordingly. J. Show 20-foot utility easement for the storm sewer between Lots 2 and 3 7. On the utility plans: a. Show all existing and proposed drainage and utility easements. b. Show the proposed sanitary and storm sewer stubs inverts. c. Add storm sewer schedule. d. Public storm sewer pipe type must be RCP and 15-inch minimum diameter. e. The last street accessible storm manhole (STMH#2) must be built with a sump. f. Revise sanitary sewer pipe.from DIP to PVC-C900. g. On the utility profile show all sewer and pipe crossings. h. Minimum vertical separation must be 18 inches between watermain and sewer. i. Call out watermain fittings Bob Generous July 13, 2005 Page 6 8. Any retaining wall over four feet in height must be designed by a registered Civil Engineer in the state of Minnesota with an approved safety fence on top of it. Also, it will require a building permit from the Building .Department. 9. Add the following City of Chanhassen Detail Plate Nos. 1002, 2109, 2110 2204, 3104, 3109, 5201, 5205, 5214 and 5215. 10. Prior to final plat approval, a professional civil engineer registered in the state of Minnesota must sign all plans. 11. All of the ponds are required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. 12. Cross -access easements for the shared driveway accesses must be obtained and recorded against the lots. 13. Any off -site grading will require easements from the appropriate property owner. 14. Public utility improvements will be required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required at the time of final platting. The applicant will also be required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. The applicant must be aware that all public utility improvements will require a preconstruction meeting before building permit issuance. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. 15. Cross -access easements will need to be obtained and recorded against the lots for each of the entrance drives. 16. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes and traffic control plans. The applicant should be aware that any off -site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. 17. All private streets are required to have 24-foot wide paved streets from back -of -curb to back -of -curb, be built to a 7-ton design and contained within a 40-foot wide private easement. At the completion of the project, a Bob Generous July 13, 2005 Page 7 the developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 7-ton design. 18. All plans must be signed by a registered engineer in the state of Minnesota. 19. All of the proposed house pads must. have a rear yard elevation at least three feet above the HWL of the adjacent ponds. 20. installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's Building Department. 21. Comply with the Jbne 28, 2005Carver County memo and revise the plans accordingly. 23. Revise plan sheet size to 24 x 36 using scale 50. c: Paul 4ehme, Public Works Director/City Engineer Alyson Morris, Assistant City Engineer g:\exig\projomkhanwestbuspark\preginnary plat review.doc i NEWCUP IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII lillNEWCLIP f+ftp OF MEMORANDUM CMNSENTO: Bob Generous, Senior Planner PO Box 147 FROM: Mak Sweidan, Engineer ftfaA MN 55317 loll' DATE: July 11, 2005 Administration i4ve 952227,1100 FM%2227.1110 SUBJ: Preliminary Plat Review for Chanhassen West Business Park Addition - LUR No. 05-07 Building Inspections PhoM %2.227.1180 k 952227.1190 r�J Upon review of the plans dated June 17, 2005, prepared by Schoell & Madson, Engineering Pt%Z227.1160 Inc., I offer the following comments: Fax �2.227,1i 70 GRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL Finance MM %2227.1140 F=%2227.1110 The existing site is about 44.75 acres in size with scattered wetlands. In addition, there are three existing buildings on the property which will have to be razed prior Park & Recreation to any grading operations. -The current plans show buildings with proposed floor et>o M71.112o F2�C�2227,1110 elevations from 961-966. The applicant is now ' proposing to grade about 83% of pP � P P g pweatimeef& the site for the new building pads, storm pond and a proposed street ending with a 23t0CasftBw%%Td cul-de-sac. The current plans propose eight lots located along the proposed street PJ=W227.1400 and cul-de-sae. F2�c�2227.i404 Planning & There are a few areas of concern with the grading plan. Staff would like to see Natural Resources the applicant do a better job of matching in with the existing topography of the Phu e%2227.1130 fa�c%2.227.1110 site and maintain a side slope of 3:1 maximum. The existing site drains toward p g the existing three wetlands on the northwesterly, southwesterly corners and east Public Works side of the parcel. At these elevations, stormwater from the buildings and parking 1591 PARoad Pt915222I 1�10 lots will drain toward the proposed catch basins and be conveyed via storm sewer Fax952227.13t0 system to the proposed storm pond on the southwesterly corner of the parcel. The pond will treat the water before discharging it to the adjacent wetland. Senior Center P= 952227.1125 Fax %M7.1110 All -of the ponds are required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP}-standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. The WebSiteapplicant www. is required to meet the existing site runoff rates for the.10-year and 100- year, 24-hour storm events. Storm sewer sizing calculations must be submitted at the time of final -plat application. The storm sewer must be sized for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility easements must be dedicated on the final plat over the public storm drainage system including ponds, drainage swales, and wetlands up to the 100-year flood level. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. - SCANNED The City of Chanhassen •Agrow�r canB;xsnitymihoteanlades,qualitysciwais,aCAaafii�doardown,tf�nring�snesses,wiruiingtrails,andbeautifulparks.Agwatplacetollmwork,zrdplay. ® 0 Bob Generous July 11, 2005 Page 2 The applicant must be aware that a retaining wall structure is not allowed within the public street right-of-way. Also, any retaining wall exceeding four feet in height mustbe designed by a registered structural engineer, with approved safety fence and a building permit must be obtained. Erosion control measures and site restoration must be developed in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPI-1). Staff recommends that the City's Type II erosion control fence, which is a heavy duty silt fence, be used for the area adjacent to the existing wetlands on the north and south grading limits of the site. Type I silt fence shall be used in all other areas. A minimum 75-foot long rock construction entrance must be shown at the entrance drive that will be utilized during construction. In addition, tree preservation fencing must be installed at the limits of tree removal. Erosion control blankets are recommended for all of the steep 3:1 slopes with an elevation change of eight feet or more. All disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. The applicant should be aware that any off -site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes. A minimum 75-foot rock construction entrance must be added to the plans at the proposed access off of Galpin Boulevard. UTILITIES Municipal sewer and water stubs are available to the site from Galpin Boulevard on the east side of the parcel. The applicant is proposing to connect to the existing utility stubs and extend them to the proposed lots to service the site. The sanitary and watermain lines that run within the public street right-of-way and within the shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5 until the last sanitary manhole will be considered a public utility line and the remaining will be considered private utility. Additional gate valves are needed for the shared private watermain between any two lots. Minimum 20-foot wide easements will be required over the public portion of the storm sewer lines between Lots 2 and 3. The underlying property has been previously assessed for sewer, water and street improvements and there is no remaining assessment due payable to the City. Since the developer will be responsible for extending lateral sewer and water service to the lots, the sanitary sewer and water connection charges will be waived. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. 0 0 Bob Generous July 11, 2005 Page 3 All of the utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Upon completion of the utility improvements, the utilities will be turned over to the City for maintenance and ownership. The applicant is also required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will have to be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed. District, Carver County, MriDOT, etc. STREETS The proposed development lies west of Galpin Boulevard (CSAH 19) and north of Lyman Boulevard (CSAH IS), A -Minor Expander Arterials as identified on SRF Consulting Group Incorporated's Functional Classification Map. Proposed access to the site will be from Galpin Boulevard, which aligns with Stone Creek Drive, an existing local street extending east of Galpin Boulevard. Staff has researched the feasibility to move the proposed site access.from Galpin Boulevard to Lyman Boulevard in response to citizens' requests. Due to wetland conditions, any access from the site to Lyman Boulevard would be 1,000 feet. west of Galpin Boulevard. Carver County has identified Lyman Boulevard as a regional east -west collector with limited access; therefore Staff recommends that. the access to Chanhassen West Business Park remain at the Galpin Boulevard/Stone Creek Drive intersection. This recommendation is also consistent with Section 18-57 of the City Code, which states that "access to arterial streets shall be at intervals of not less than one-fourth mile [1,320 feet] and through existing and established crossroads". SRF Consulting Group, Inc. analyzed the 2020 transportation system in conjunction with the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan. SRF's forecasted 2020 traffic volume for Galpin Boulevard was based on the 2020 Land Use Map and the construction of the new Trunk Highway 212. The proposed land use of the Chanhassen West Business Park is consistent with the 2020 land use used in SRF's traffic analysis. SRF's report does not identify a need to upgrade Galpin Boulevard by the year 2020. Right turn lanes for north and southbound traffic exist at the Galpin Boulevard intersection with Stone Creek Road and the proposed site access. The developer must submit an access permit to Carver County Public Works for the proposed connection to Galpin Boulevard. As stipulated by the Assistant County Engineer, the developer must submit information on proposed turn lanes with the permit application. Bob Generous July 11, 2005 Page 4 There is one public street proposed with the project. The street is proposed as a ° cul-de-sac running west of Galpin Boulevard and a private shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5. The applicant is proposing the paved streets to be 32-feet wide with a 60-foot wide right-of-way and a 46-foot cul-de-sac paved radius. The applicant must be aware that the City's standard commercial street pavement t width is 36-foot wide from back -of -curb to back -of -curb and the cul-de-sac must A be 48-foot in radius. Staff is fine with the 24-foot wide shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5. The developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 7-ton design. Staff has concerns of movements of truck traffic accessing off Galpin Boulevard to Lots 1 and 8 being too close. Staff recommends increasing the access width to 44 feet to create a three lane access off. Galpin Boulevard and increase the turning curb radius. Also, relocate Lots .1 and 8 easterly accesses further to the west and re -align them opposite of each other. The applicant should be aware that, in commercial districts, six-foot wide sidewalks are required and the parking driveway aisle must be 26-foot wide. Cross -access easements will be obtained for the shared driveways and recorded against the lots. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Prior to final platting, storm sewer design data will need to be submitted for staff review. Depending on the size of the drainage area, additional catch basins may be required at that time. The storm sewer will have to be designed for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility easements will need to be dedicated on the final plat over the public storm drainage system including ponds, drainage swales, emergency overflows, access routes for maintenance, and wetlands up to the 100-year flood level. The minimum easement width shall be 20 feet wide. 2. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. 3. Private utility easements are required for the sanitary sewer and water lines that serve Lot 4 but go through Lot 5. 4. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. 5. On the site plan: a. Revise the cul-de-sac pavement radius to 48 feet. 0 0 Bob Generous July 11, 2005 Page 5 b. Revise the parking driveway aisle from 24 feet to 26 feet wide. c. Revise the public street width from 32 feet to 36 feet wide. d. Increase the full access width off Galpin Boulevard to 44 feet and. create three lane access. e. Shift Lots 1 and 8 easterly access further toward the west and realign the across each other. f Show at least one, 6-foot wide, side walk along the public street. g. Show the access off Galpin Boulevard turning curb radius. h. Realign lot 5 access perpendicular to the shared driveway. I. Show street lights. J. Show handicap parks and ramps. 6. On the grading plan: a. Extend silt fence type between the storm pond and Outlot A. Silt fence Type II must be used adjacent to wetlands and storm pond. b. Revise contour lines to match 3:1 maximum slope and tie the proposed contour lines with the existing contours for Lots 4, 5, south of Lot 2 and northeast of Lot 1. c. , Show the proposed contour lines for Lot 6. d. Show all retaining walls top and bottom elevations. e. Show all emergency overflows (EOF). The EOF must be 1.5' lower than the adjacent lowest floor. f. Revise Lot 6 parking slope to 0.7% minimum. g. Add a note to remove any existing structure and access off Galpin Boulevard and all disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. h. Show 75-foot minimum construction rock entrance. L No retaining walls structure is allowed within public street and/or public utility easements, revise accordingly. J. Show 20-foot utility easement for the storm sewer between Lots 2 and 3 7. On the utility plans: a. Show all existing and proposed drainage and utility easements. b. Show the proposed sanitary and storm sewer stubs inverts. c. Add storm sewer schedule. d. Public storm sewer pipe type must be RCP and 15-inch minimum diameter. e. The last street accessible storm manhole (STMH#2) must be built with a sump. f. Revise sanitary sewer pipe from DIP to PVC-C900. g. On the utility profile show all sewer and pipe crossings. h. Minimum vertical separation must be 18 inches between watermain and sewer. i. Call out watermain fittings Bob Generous July 11, 2005 Page 6 8. Any retaining wall over four feet in height must be designed by a registered Civil Engineer in the state of Minnesota with an approved safety fence on top of it. Also, it will require a building permit from the Building Department. 9. Add the following City of Chanhassen Detail Plate Nos. 1002, 2109, 2110 2204, 3104, 3109, 5201, 5205, 5214 and 5215. 10. Prior to final plat approval, a professional civil engineer registered in the state of Minnesota must sign all plans. 1.1. All of the ponds are required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. 12. Cross -access easements for the shared driveway accesses must be obtained and recorded against the lots. 13. Any off -site grading will require easements from the appropriate property owner. 14. Public utility improvements will be required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required at the time of final platting. The applicant will also be required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. The applicant must be aware that all public utility improvements will require a preconstruction meeting before building permit issuance. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. 15. Cross -access easements will need to be obtained and recorded against the lots for each of the entrance drives. 16. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes and traffic control plans. The applicant should be aware that any off -site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. 17. All private streets are required to have 24-foot wide paved streets from back -of -curb to back -of -curb, be built to a 7-ton design and contained within a 40-foot wide private easement. At the completion of the project, " Bob Generous July 11, 2005 Page 7 the developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 7-ton design. 18. All plans must be signed by a registered engineer in the state of Minnesota. 19. All of the proposed house pads must have a rear yard elevation at least three feet above the HWL of the adjacent ponds. 20. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's Building Department. 21. Comply with the June 28, 2005Carver County memo and. revise the plans accordingly. 23. Revise plan sheet size to 24 x 36 using scale 50. c: Paul Oehme, Public Works Director/City Engineer Alyson Morris, Assistant City Engineer glenglprojcm\chanwestbusparklprelemenwry plat review.doe ' r i • NEWDOC ti i • rc " CITY OF CIS ESEN MEMORANDUM 7700 Market Bout wd P11 Box 147 OWh3MMM55317 TO: Robert Generous, Senior Planner Administration Rone 952221.1100 FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal Fax W.227.1110 DATE: July 6, 2005 Building Inspections P1 %2227.1180 Fw%2.227.1190 SUBJ: Request for rezoning of property from agricultural estate district (A-2) to planned unit development (PUD), preliminary plat approval and I n9 5222ng7.1160 Phor� 952.22 wetland alteration permit on property located on the northwest corner fu%2227.1170 Of the intersection of Lyman Boulevard and Galpin.Boulevard — Chanhassen West Business Park. Applicant Eden Trace corporation Finance 9522�111140 110 Planning Case: 05-23 Park & Recreation I have reviewed the above rezoning request for the,above project.. -.In order to comply F227.1120 a 955M.1110 with the Chanhassen FireDepartment/Fire Prevention Division I have -the following fire ReaeaticnCer& code or city ordinance/policy requirements. The plan review is based on the available 2310WWBas%M information submitted at this time. If additional plans or changes are submitted, the P1row952.227.1400 appropriate code or policy items will be addressed. Fax 962227.1901 Planning & 1. A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants i.e., street lamps, Natural Resources trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. , Ptun952227.1.130 This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by Fax 952.221.i1f0 firefighters.`- Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. Public Works 1591 Park RW 2. Fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for fire protection is required to PFn% 2'27.13l0 Fax 952.22T.1310 be installed. Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable nor to and p p --during the time of construction except when approved alternate methods of. Senior center protection are provided. ft,c 952227.1125 Fax %2227.1110 - 3. The new proposed street will be required to have a street name. Submit Web Site proposed street name to Chanhassen Building Official and Fire WWW-d4WtMZV= .Chanhassen Marshal for review and approval. 4. No burning permits will be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. The City of Cba nbasse n 9 A growiq cwmltywithdwMes.qualitysd**,ac�5amrgdowntown,thlivingbusinesses,windingtraits,aWbeautifulpaft.Agmtpiacetotnre, Awk,and play, Mr. Robert Generous July 6, 2005 Page 2 5. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed load of fire apparatus and shall be surfaced so as to provide all weather driving capabilities. Pursuant to Minnesota Fire code Section 503.2.3. 6. Temporary street signs shall be installed on street intersections when construction of a new roadway allows passage be vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota fire code Section 501.4. g\safetyln IVIm05-23 0 - MEMORANDUM ./I," CITYOF CUMNSEN TO: Bob Generous, Senior Planner 77001Ularicetear' od FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Director PO Box 147 Uah=A >w155317 DATE: July 11, 2005 Administration P 952227.1i00 SUBJ: Chanhassen West Business Park, Park and Trail Conditions of Fax 952.227.1110 Approval Building Inspections Ptxxr- 952227.1180 F=M227.1190 Engineering PARKS ftm952227.1160 Fax 952227.1170 The proposed Chanhassen West Business Park is situated within the park service Finance areas of Stone Creek Park and the Chanhassen Nature Preserve. Stone Creek Park Mm%2.227.1140 is a seven -acre neighborhood park located across Galpin Boulevard. ,Amenities at fax 952.227.1110 the park include a sliding hill, basketball court, playground, benches and trails. The Park & Recreation Chanhassen Nature Preserve is a 100-acre natural area featuring both wetland and Mw%2227.1120 Fax %2.227.1110 upland areas and a comprehensive pedestrian trial system. Reaeat�nCe V 2310 Couter Bas'ezd TRAILS Ptm 952.221.1400 Fax M.227.1404 An existing section of the city's Comprehensive Trail Plan parallels the eastern Planning & border of the subject property. Future plans call for a pedestrian trail on the north' Natural Resources side of Lyman.Boulevard. Care should be taken to protect sufficient right-of-way Pt W227.1130 for this future improvement. Far, 952.227.1110 Puhlicworks 'PARK AND TRAIL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1591 Farkpad Mm 95P.227.13M FX952227.1310 In lieu of parkland dedication and trail construction, full park fees shall be collected at the rate in force at the time of final plat for the proposed Chanhassen West Senior Center Business Park. At current rates, the park fee would total $359,500 (35.95 x $10,000 RM 952227.1125 Fax%M7.1110 per acre). Web site G:1Plan12005 'Plannin Cases105-23 Chanhassen West Business Park) ark www.�us g p comments.doc The City of Chanhassen • A growing con=4 with dean lakes, gality sdwols; a charming dowrdown, tl rig bAs nesses,w"rrding trails, aW beautiful parks. A qmt Place to ft.work, and play. Date: To: From: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 June 20, 2005 Development Plan Referral Agencies Planning Department By: Robert Generous, Senior Planner Subject: Request for Rezoning of property from Agricultural Estate District (A-2) to Planned Unit Development (PUD), Preliminary Plat Approval, and Wetland Alteration Permit on property located on the northwest corner of the intersection of Lyman Boulevard and Galpin Boulevard — Chanhassen West Business Park. Applicant: Eden Trace Corporation Planning Case: 05-23 The above described application for approval of a land development proposal was filed with the Chanhassen Planning Department on June 17, 2005. The 60-1ay review period ends August 16, 2005. In order for us to provide a complete analysis of issues for Planning Commission and City Council review, we would appreciate your comments and recommendations concerning the impact of this proposal on traffic circulation, existing and proposed future utility services, storm water drainage, and the need for acquiring public lands or easements for park sites, street extensions or improvements, and utilities. Where specific needs or problems exist, we would.like to have a written report to this effect from the agency concerned so that we can make a recommendation to the Planning Commission and City Council. This application is scheduled for consideration by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on July 19, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Chanhassnti en City Hall. We would appreciate receiving your comments by no later than July 8, 2005. You may also appear at the Planning Commission meeting if you so desire. Your cooperation and assistance is greatly appreciated. I. City Departments: a. City Engineer b. City Attorney c. City Park Director d. Fire Marshal e. Building Official f. Water Resources Coordinator g. Forester 2. Carver Soil & Water Conservation District 3. MN Dept. of Transportation 4. MN Dept. of Natural Resources 5. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 7. Carver County a. Engineer b. Environmental Services 8. Watershed District Engineer a. Riley-Purgatory-Bluf€Creek b. LowerMinnesota River c. Minnehaha Creek d. Carver County Water Resource Management Area 9. Telephone Company (Qwest and Sprint/United) 10. Electric Company (Xcel Energy or MN Valley) 11. Mediacoin 6. U.S. Fish & Wildlife 12. CenterPoint Energy Minnegasco SCANNED Location Map Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 8470 Galpin Boulevard City of Chanhassen ■ PR SCMNEo ll�r, �� I I IVVL.V I If VI vniv!<H I [vIN Lo- TA L SITE AREA: � SITE S.F. 1,748,718 S.F.. 40.15 .P d u�,9rt r��.�� O` T ` y4 a. 6 TOTAL S r F ",= LrOTr+rCkL1J�* t166;2 33 S.F.,, � ; F � 242i23 ASPHALT S.F. "ASPHALT = ° ASPHALT, 65,,07;S...F BUILDING 50.265 S.F. BUILDING, = 46.982 S.F.>,, , DING -s127$99SF rr 1,390 S.F. SIDEWALK ," ..!, FSIDEWALK GREENSPACE = 72,455 S.F = 44% GREENSPACE 44,695 S.F = 31%. .GREENSPACE e= 29;212 S.F = 23%* LOT 4: 0�,. T 5: :: LOTS. 6: TOTAL S.F. w 219,215 S.F. 1� TOTAL S.F. = 156,190 S.F. TOTAL S.F. = 257.813 S.F. ASPHALT = 62,137 S.F. ASPHALT = 50,467 S.F. ASPHALT = 75.883 S.F. n BUILDING = 40,526 S.F. BUILDING = �� 41,689 S.F. BUILDING = 77,754 S.F.- SIDEWALK = Y= 1,933 S.F. SIDEWALK = 1.739 S.F. SIDEWALK 4,663 S.F. GREENSPACE 114,619 S.F = 52% GREENSPACE = 62,295 S.F = 40% GREENSPACE = 99,513 S.F = 39% 0O T 7: LOT 8: OUTLOT A: TOTAL S.F. = 82,385 S.F. TOTAL S.F. = 97,843 S.F. TOTAL S.F. = 180,643 S.F. ASPHALT = 41,126 S.F. `�� ASPHALT = 41,068 S.F. BUILDING = 23,124 S.F. BUILDING = 25,914 S.F. OUTLOT B: SIDEWALK = 2,864 S.F. SIDEWALK = 3,588 S.F. TOTAL S.F. = 92,577 S.F. GREENSPACE = 15,271 S.F = 19% GREENSPACE = 27,273 S.F 28% MAXIMUM OF 70% HARD SURFACE COVERAGE — AVERAGE FOR ENTIRE SITE MINIMUM OF 3074 GREENSPACE — 1,748.718 TOTAL SITE S.F. X 30% = 524,615 S.F. SITE HAS 855,302 S.F. OR 49% — MEETS REQUIREMENTS TOTAL GREENSPACE AREA (EXCLUDE OUTLOT A. A B) 649,698- S.F 447. PARKING PROVIDED: 552 SPACES SITE PLAN RE UIREMENTS: 50' BUILDING & PARKING SETBACK ALONG GALPIN BLVD. AND LYMAN BLVD. — NO REQUIREMENTS FOR INTERIOR SETBACKS :, s�t`� • �t ARBOR PARK THIRD ADDITON Oi \" 11 r,l �� 1 : 1 � '.`Cry �•".3^°""„- �rv.+•-.�•-'?-� i�•� `' - •1 0 � N p/ a� 'j �'e�x+�' � • � '' ^ � '�_ emu,. . l�l � I � ' y M � >1 � ' 1 # . a GI • _ -• • a l � ar►.r:r a - �n� ': = � � • � � O �.: / Off'. I f f Sec. 20-505. Required general standards Setback standards/structures and parft PUD exterior. 50 feet b PUD-Industrial �. Q M Lh = i�8 It 0 O j r-. n h O Localorinterior pubEc right-of-way 0 O wo � PUD-industrial n o. o CD 35 feet se a 100 foot Buffer Law Density Residential Street City Council may reduce buffer by half 1OP: Buffer yard (ft.), plus PUD: Buffer yard (ft.), plus Setback: building (ft.), Setback: building (ft.), parking (ft.) parking (ft.) Gal in Blvd. 50, 21us 30, 25 50, plus 50,20 Lyman Blvd. 0, plus 30, 25 0, plus 50, 20 Street A 0, 30, 10 (with landscaping) 0, plus 30, 10 (with landsca in ) Interior Lot Lines 0, 10,10 0, plus 0, 0 West Perimeter Lot Line (adjacent to 0, 10, 10 0, plus 30,20 industrial) North Perimeter Lot Line (adjacent to 100, plus 50, 50 100, plus 30,20 residential): Buffer yard & setback (*building setbacks are height or 30 feet whichever isgreater) Office Industrial across Galpin Blvd. From Low density, across Lyman Blvd. from Office/industrial. West — officelindustrial. North — low density. Trip Generation Chanhassen West Business Park Assume maximum 350,000 square feet of building area Source: Trip Generation, a Addition,' Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1997 Industrial Park: Avg. Weekday 6.96 per 1,000 sq. ft. gross floor area = a 2,436 trip ends A.M. peak 0.89 per 1,000 sq. ft. — 311 trip ends P.M. peak 0.92 per 1,000 sq. ft. = 322 trip ends Avg. Saturday 2.49 per 1,000 sq. ft. = 872 trip ends Avg. Sunday 0.73 per 1,000 sq. ft. = 256 trip ends Mixed Park assume 30% Office, 35%warehousing, 35% light manufacturing: 105,000 sq. ft, 122,500 sq. ft.,122,500 sq. ft. Avg. Weekday, Office, 11.01 per 1,000 sq. ft. = 1,156 trip ends Avg. Weekday, warehouse, 4.96 per 1,000 sq. ft. — 608 trip ends Avg. Weekday, light industrial, 6.97 per 1,000 sq.-R. = 854_trip ends Total = 2,618 trip ends A.M. peak, Office, 1.56 per 1,000 sq. ft. 164 trip ends A.M. peak, Warehouse, 0.45 per 1,000 sq. ft. = 55 trip ends A.M. peak, light industrial, 0.92 per 1,000 sq. ft. = 113 trip ends Total = 332 trip ends P.M. peak, office, 1.49 per 1,000 sq. ft. _ 156 trip ends P.M. peak, warehouse, 0.51 per 1,000 sq. ft. — 62 trip ends P.M. peak, light industrial, 0.98 per 1,000 sq. ft. = 120 trip ends Total — 338 trip ends Avg. Saturday, Office, 2.37 per 1,000 sq. ft. = 249 trip ends Avg. Saturday, warehouse, 1.22 per 1,000 sq. ft. = 149 trip ends Avg. Saturday, light industrial, .1.32 per 1,000 sq. ft.= 162 trip ends Total = 560 trip ends Avg. Sunday, Office, 0.98 per 1,000 sq. ft. 103 trip ends Avg. Sunday, warehouse, 0.79 per 1,000 sq.-ft. = 97 trip ends Avg. Sunday, light industrial, 0.68 per 1,000 sq. ft. = 83Ttrip_ends Total = 283 trip ends Miscellaneous: Truck trips average eight percent of trips (range I 22 percent) Transit 0.05 per 1,000 sq. ft. = 18 trip ends General Office Building code 710 Industrial Park code 130 General Light Industrial code 110 Warehousing code 150 510413005 JX-AR Techmlogie$, Inc. TAS for Windows Site Code : 0005104730 on Lake Drive West Copyright 1999 Start Date: 08/01/2005 West of Audubon Road File X.D. C:%PROGRAM Street name :La Drive Crosg 8treet:Audubon Road page Time A.M. Mest Tues. P.M. A.M. P.M.A.M. -wel.- P.M. 7FRUr. Fri. A.H.P.M. A.M. P.M.j sat. A.M. P.M. sun. A.M. P.M. X119. A.M. P.M. 12:05 12-.15 0 57 4 62 2 1 60 62 12.30 0 56 2 69 fis 12-45 1 455 0 65 3 41 01:00 2 39t 4 43 4 38 01:15 6 40 32 .1 35 3 34 2 33 01:30 01.45 .1 3 41 1 25 2 33 02.00 1 45 0 40 0 2. 42 02.15 0 42 S .55 Z 1 118 52 02.30 48 0 $6. 0 44 02:45 44 0 43 0 2 102 03:00 « « « 101 2 104 1 6 54 03-15 51 5 57 6 •4 47 03.30 46 6 48 3 • 4 44 03.-45 43 3 46 6 13 48 04:00 47 1 50 5 10 47 04:15 48 6 46 .13 5 46 04-30 45 S 48 6. 6 172 04:45 05:00 66 46 5 8 79 51 7 11 •10 48 0$:15 35 13 26 9 11 18 30 30 05:30 27 16 34 19 42 28 05:45 .17 47 19 38 « •56 12 06-.00 .10 67 13 45 60 10 06:15 06-30 9 23 66 33 10 10 55 34 34 16 06:45 10 66 5 61 64 34 8 9 07:00 12 37 6 31 33 17 *07:15 « 10 35 4 31 8 07,30 4 34 11 43 73 6 07.4$ 2 64 10 82 51 2 08:00 2 56 1 46 45 1 08:15 2 49 0 41 45 2 98.30 1. 39 4 51 42 1 08:45 1 45 1 .,35 • 38 2 09:00 « « 5 31 0 44 24 1 09-15 0 .30 2 17 38 6 09:30 8 40 3. 38 4 09:45 10.00 3 5 35 24 4 2' 40 39 32 4 MIS r « 5 34 3 43 « «38 32 4 0 10:30 1 33 0 31 36 5 10:4$ 3 391 7 33 29 6 11-00 7 27 5 31 38 3 11:2S 5 39 1 38 60 : 16 11.30 17 55 16 65 S 9 2 11-Ae .1 59 4 59 Day Totals 0 Percent; SpI Peaks Volume 816-- 2475 ` 1674 Q% 100.0% 47.3% 52.6% 70.5% 25.4% 02:30 06:00 02:30 07:45 12:00 244 232 260 220 262 "60 .86_ ..62 =-,67 - % 0 0 47.5% 06:00 214 .83 Development within Chanhassen Business Center: Development Office Manufacturing Warehouse Church PUD Re uirements ... 120 700 150,875 326,425 5,500 1-1-1. Church (1) 5,500 1-2-1 N W S 17,500 4-1-2 Power System 7,433 20,317 7-1-2 Paulstarr 7,287 18,017 2-1-2 Highland 1,802 7,359 1-1-3 Control Products 10,000 16,750 8,250 1-1-2 T T S 11 7,749 20,999 10,000 5-1-2 Chuck's 2,560 14,144 4-1-3 U.S. P.O. 5,300 15,200 24,400 6-1-2 Boedecker 8,750 26,250 2-1-4 Quantum 10,000 5,000 1-1-4 Matthews 10,006 28,554 2-1-3 Da Co 5,688 19,451 3-1-3 Dover 19,490 3-1-2 Material Evaluation & Testing__ 9,582 Total Building Area 123,147 52,949 181,742 5,500 357,838 sq. ft. total, excluding church. W a NEWDOC Z� O n� 1 t i S NEWDOC �r ;r J r _ •a .r • =r~; -ZONING f § 20-812 (6) The maximum height is as follows: a. For the principal structure, two stories. b. For accessory structures, one story. (7) Minimum setback requirements: .. F a. For front yards, 35 feet; . b. For rear yards, 30 feet. . c.. For side yards, 15 feet. _ d. The minimum setback is 50 feet when it abuts a residential district without being. separated from the residential district by a street or railroad right-of-way. (Ord. No... 80, Art. V, § 15(5-15-5), 12-15-86; Ord. No: 94, §§ 1; 61, 7-25-88) ' Sec. 20-796. Interim uses. The following are interim uses in the "Ol" District- (1) Temporary classroom structures for use by public or private schools needed for temporary use. _ (Ord. No. 282, § 1, 6-22-98) = s ' Secs. 20-797 20-810. Reserved. ARTICLE NMI- 'SOP" INDUSTRIAL OFFICE PARK DISTRICT Sec. 20-811. Intent. The intent of the "IOP" District is to provide an area identified for large scale light industrial and commercial planned development. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 16(5-16-1),.12-15-86) Sec. 20.812. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in an "IOP" District: ` (1) Antennas as re a � f gutated by article XXX of chapter. l r (2) �utu:wotiexepsishops. yt..��-e � (3) Conferencelconvention centers. (4) Health services. ' (5) indQa health and recreation clubs. (6) Light industrial. (7) Offices. _ .! (8) Q o CD20.141 r V _ ' - § 20-812 CHANHASSEN .CITY CODE (9) Print shmr, (10) g s u (11) -Utility services. (12) Voenfoffr'Sehool. _ 3 (13) Warehouses. (Ord. No. 80, .Art. V, § 16(5-16-2)2 12-15-86; Ord. No. 240; §"21,• 7-25-95; Ord., No, 259, § 27, 11-12-96; Ord. No. 377, § 109, 5-24-04) Sec. 20-813. Permitted accessory uses. The following are, permitted accessory uses in an,"IOP" District: (1) " .gyp ��"•' . - .. (2) Day care center.( (3) Parking lots and ramps. (4) Signs. " 'Retail sales of products stored or manufactured n the site -provided no more than 20 } percent of the floor space is used for retail sales. 0�_; (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 16(5-16-3), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 93, § 1, 7-25-88; Ord. No. 377, § 10, 5-24-04) Sec. 20-814. Conditional uses. The following are conditional uses in an "IOP" District: , (1) Contracting yards. (2) Day care centers as part of a multitenant building. (3) Day care centers as a separate facility. (4) "FSG ptf' rocceessing (5) Zome4WZEem (6) Hotelsandmotels.' . _ (8) ..Mota ei rminals. • , (9) Guix oorhealth and recreation clubs, r ' (10) Screened outdoor storage. . (11) Research laboratories. y , (12) Reserved. CD20:142 - N -20=815 (13) - Commercial towers as regulated, by article XkX of this chapter. C\ (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 16(5-16-4), 12-15-86, Ord. No. 97, _g 1, 10-24-88; rC c�o. 120, § 4(12), 2-12-90; Ord. No. 259, § 28, 11-12-96; Ord. No. 377, § 111,-5-24-04) R State Iaw reference --Conditional uses, M.S. § 462.3595. Sec. 20-815. Lot requirements and setbacks. The following minimum requirements shall be observed in an "10P" District subject to additional requirements, exceptions and modifications set forth in this chapter: ' (1) The minimum lot area is one acre. (2) The minimum lot frontage is 150 feet_, except that lots fronting on, a cuI-de•sac `shall ,+ have a minimum frontage of 60 feet. (3) The minimum lot depth is 200 feet."�`� ` (4) The maximum lot coverage is 70 percent., ��- (5) Off-street parking shall comply with district setback requirements except; a. There is no minimum setback when it abuts a railroad right•of-way,,.except as S = provided in sections 20-1191 and 204192 pertaining to landscaping require- ments. _ f b. There is no minimum setback.when'it abuts, without'being separated by a street, 1 LX, �4 another off-street parking area. C. The minimum setback is 50 feet when it abuts a residential district without being r separated from the residential district by a street or railroad right-of'-.wpy. d. The minimum setback is 25 feet for side street side yards., J,4 `� e. Parking setbacks along publicrights-of-w� y may be reduced to -a nz,n; of text , J' feet .if the applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the city `that one -hundred -percent screening is provided at least five feet above tlie-adjacent parking lot. The intent of this section is that the city is willing to trade a reduced setback for additionaf landscaping that is both an effective screen and of high s quality aesthetically. Acceptable screening is to be comprised of berming3and - landscaping. Screening through the use of fencing is not permitted. (6) The maximum height is as follows: a sr A a. For the principal structure, four storiesl50 feet. 3 b. For accessory structures, one story. (7) Minimum setback requirements: Y a. For front yards, 30 feet. 3� b. For rear yards, ten feet.� c. For side yards ten feet. CD20:143 8 n § 20-815 `CHANHASSEN CITY CODE d. The minimum setback is 50 feet when it abuts a residential district without being separated from the residential district by a street or railroad.right-o%way. ,e., Buffer yards: The city comprehensive plan establishes a requirement for buffer ' yards. Buffer yards are to be established in areas indicated on the plan where higher intensity uses interface with low density;uses. In these areas, a 50-foot buffer yard is to be provided where the interface occurs along a public street, a ' 1.00-foot b er yard is required where.the interface occurs on -internal lot lines. The buffer yard is an additional setback requirement. It is- to be cumulatively Y calculated with the required setbacks outlined above. The full obligation to provide the = _ _ buffer yard shall be placed on the parcel containing the higher intensity use. The buffer yard is intended to provide additional physical separation -and screening for the higher intensity use. As such, they will be required to be provided with a combination of berming, landscaping and/or' tree preservation to maximize the buffering potential. To the extent deemed feasible by the city, new plantings shall be designed to require the minimum of maintenance, however, such maintenance as may be required to,maintain consistency w with the approved plan, shall be the obligation of the property owner. S Buffer yards shall,be covered ,by a permanently ,recorded conservation easement:ti running in favor of the city. In instances where existing topography and/or vegetation; provide buffering satisfac- tory to the city, or where quality site plantung is achieved, the city may reduce buffer yard requirements by up to 50 percent. The applicant shall have the full burden of demonstrating compliance with the standards herein. {Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 16(5-16-.5),12-15-86;..Ord. No..94, §§...1, 7, 7-25.88; Ord. No.136, §§ 1A, , 1B;1-28-91) a a A - . = P- See. `20-81G Interim -uses. - The following -are interim uses in the "IOP" District: - (1) Churches. (2) Concrete mixing plants. (Oi d. No.120, § 3, 2-12-90) Secs. 20-817-- 20-900. Reser v6d. CD20:144 NEWDOC �S t a v` ` S a Planning Case No. C)!J 223 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market,Boulevard — P.O. Box 147 . Chanhassen, MN • 55317 — (952) 227-1100 . a . CITY Or= CHANNASSEN RECEIVED k DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION JUN 17 2005 rue.......-_. FLt=Abh PKINT" Applicant Name ae Address: _ �� Tra.c e_ ter Contact: Phone:-4SZ.36f--oM Fax: 361-o72T Email: _tj^de A e_ g&[ _ c.a,&, _ Comprehensive Plan Amendment Conditional Use Permit Interim Use Permit Non -conforming Use Permit Planned Unit Development's -,tee- `150 =a , Rezoning „ I Sign Permits Sign Plan Review - -""j'Ocri VLANNING Owner Name and -Address, C u ss r Ss� 7 Contact: Phone: ?Q:g , 47� Fax: Zo y Email: Temporary Sales Permit Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements Variance Wetland Alteration Permit 275. Zoning Appeal Zoning Ordinance Amendment 115 Notification Sign"* - $75 + $100 Damage Deposit X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attdrney Cost**" Site Plan Review' winor P/SPRNACNARNAP/Metes & Bounds n / �SUB Subdivision* (�/J��Gp';' t5x` lo�� TOTAL FEE $ t �� An additional fee of $3.00 per address within the public hearing notification area will be invoiced to the applicant prior to the public hearing. Twenty-six (26) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8W X.11* reduced copy for each plan sheet_ along with a digital cony in TIFF -Group 4 (".tif) format. `* Applicant to obtain notification sign from City of Chanhassen Public Works at 1591 Park Road and install upon submittal of completed application. $1DO damage deposit to be refunded to applicant when sign is returned following City Council approval. Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. NOTE: When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. Ama PROJECT NAME: ( .MA (Ae S 3-e.A We34 L'St&s ZA-e 3 S LOCATION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Sf= UsoLiL a ?. i t 6 en �a t4.o.. tk-vis, TOTAL ACREAGE: l WETLANDS PRESENT: --�`� YES NO PRESENT ZONING: REQUESTED ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: REASON FOR REQUEST: This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application. This is to certify that I am 'making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. _)*ta2a� - �l7L Signature of Applicant Date or 2�4 — &1 SCANNED Signature of Fee Owner . Date 6Wanl 0=%DeveloWent Review AWication.DOC Rev. 4105 EDEN TRACE CORP. City of Chanhassen Chanhassen West Business Center Application Fees 612=005 1,9A.�0 2 0 Checking, Galpin application fees 1,920.00 - 'CITY OF CHANHASSEN 77.00 MARKET BLVD s CHANHASSEN MN 55317 Payee: EDEN TRACE CORD Bate: 06/28/2005 Time: 10:10am Receipt Number: DW / 6277 Clerk: DANIELLE CHAN=WEST.BUS PARK #05-23 ,,ITEM REFERENCE AMOUNT P 'DEVAP CHAN WEST BUS PARK #05-23 USE & VARIANCE 1,470.00 t SIGN RENT 75.00 SIGN ESCROW 100.0 WETLAND l 275.00 r --------------- Total: 1,920.00 Check 12020 1,920.00. Change: --------------- 0.00 THANK YOU FOR YOUR PAYMENT! a q o� NEW'DOC r .^�IINwA Schoell & Madson, Inc. Planning - Engineering • Surveying September 27, 2005 Robert Generous Senior Planner, City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 CITY OF CHANHASSEN Chanhassen, MN 55317 RECEIVED SEP 3 0 2005 Re: Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case #-05-23 CKq*MSEN PLANNING DEPT Comments dated 9-6-05 Dear Bob, This letter is in response to comments received from the City of Chanhassen dated 9.6-08 regarding final plat approval for Chanhassen West Business Park. The plans have been updated to reflect comments from the city, as well as from Carver County Planning and Zoning. Please find our responses to the city comments below. 1. Landscape plantings have been changed to meet minimum requirements, and a revised Landscape plan has been included in the plan set. 2. A note and detail have been added to the Tree Preservation Plan describing tree protection fencing installation. 3. A note has been added to the Tree Preservation Plan describing what to do in case of damage or removal of trees that have been designated to be preserved. 4. A Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for Water/Wetland projects has been submitted. 5. A wetland buffer is included on the plans around all wetlands. All structures are outside of a 40' setback, which is shown on the Site Plan. 6. The developer will address this issue 7. The site drainage has been looked at in-depth, and a revised stormwater management plan is attached to this letter. 8. The pond's emergency overflow has been labeled, a detail provided, and a turf re - enforcement mat has been added for stabilization. - 9. Temporary stabilization has been addressed on the SWPPP` 10. Discharge point stabilization has been addressed on the SWPPP 11. Slope stabilization has been addressed on the SWPPP 10580 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 1 • Minneapolis, MN 55305-1525 Office (952) 546-7601 • Fax (952) 546-9065 www.schoelimadson.com 12. The swale on the west side of the property has been removed and replaced with storm sewer, so an erosion control blanket will no longer be necessary in that area. Installation time frame for other erosion control blankets is described in the SWPPP, and the blankets have been identified with a hatch on the grading plan. 13. Temporary sedimentation basins have been identified on the plan in the areas requested. A temporary outlet has been called out on the grading plan, and a detail has been added to the details sheet. 14. A general note has been added to the grading plan instructing the contractor to install Wimco-type inlet protection on all catch basins on site and on neighboring Galpin Blvd. The city standard detail for Wimco-type inlet protection is on the details sheet as well as a detail for a Wimco-type inlet control that is not in a curb line. 15. Refer to #E14 16. Type 2 silt fence has been installed along Outlot A as requested. 117. The two different types of silt fence have been designated with different linetypes, and are called out on the plans as specified. 18. Street sweeping is described on the SWPPP 19. The developer will address this issue 20. The specified permits have been applied for. 21. The developer will address this issue 22. The developer will address this issue 23. The developer will address this issue 24. A water service has been added to Lot 6 25. Proposed hydrants are clear of any landscaping or lighting features within a 10' radius. Small utility box locations will have to be coordinated with the respective companies. 26. A note regarding fire protection during construction has been added to the Site Plan. 27. The proposed street name is Galpin Court, and has been included on the plans. 28. A note has been added to the Tree Preservation Plan describing tree waste disposal 29. The developer will address this issue. 30. The developer will address this issue during construction. 31. The storm sewer has been designed for the 10-year, 24-hour storm event, and the calculations are included for city review. Drainage & utility easements have a minimum width of 20 feet, and are included over all public storm sewer. 32. Private easements will be dedicated at the time each individual lot is platted. 33. Private easements will be dedicated at the time each individual lot is platted. 34, The developer will address this issue 35. On the site plan a. The cul-de-sac radius has been changed to 48 feet b. The parking driveway aisles have been changed to 26 feet wide c. The public street has been changed to 36 feet wide d. The access width to Galpin Blvd has been widened to 3 lanes and 44 feet e. The access locations to lots 1 and 8 have been shifted to the west and are aligned to be across from each other f. A 6-foot wide sidewalk ahs been added along the public street g. The Galpin Blvd access radii have been labeled h. The access to Lot 5 has been aligned perpendicular to the shared driveway 1. Street lights have been shown j. Handicap parking spaces and ramps have been added 36. On the grading plan a. The silt fence has been modified as requested, b. The contour lines have been revised as requested c. The contour lines have been revised as requested d. Retaining wall tops and bottoms have been added e. Emergency Overflows have been shown, and all are at least 1.5' lower than proposed adjacent lowest floors f. The parking lot slope on Lot 6 has been revised to exceed the minimum g. A removal note has been added as requested h. A rock construction entrance has been shown L No retaining walls are proposed within the public right-of-way or public utility easements j. A 20-foot easement has been added to the storm sewer between lots 2 & 3 k. Contour lines appear for the berm on Outlot B 37. On the utility plan a. All existing and proposed easements are shown, to the best of our knowledge b. Stub inverts for the proposed sanitary and storm stubs have been added c. A storm sewer schedule has been added to the Public Storm Sewer plan d. Public storm sewer pipe has been changed to RCP e. A sump has been added to CBMH 2A f. The watermain has been revised to C900 PVC when the pipe diameter is proposed to be less than 12'. (The comment requested we revise the sanitary sewer from DIP to C900: we assume this was a typographical error, and watermain was meant to be noted) g. Pipe crossings have been added to the utility profiles h. Minimum vertical separation is 18' for all pipe crossings i. Watermain fittings have been called out 38. A note has been added to the grading plan. The developer will address this issue. 39. The specified details have been added to one of the two details sheets 40. A professional engineer will sign the plans prior to final approval 41. The pond has been designed to NURP standards 42. Cross -access easements for the shared entrance drives will be obtained as each individual lot is platted. a 43. The developer will address this issue 44. The latest city details and specifications have been specified in the plans and project manual. Detailed plans will be provided prior to final platting and construction of utilities, and it is understood that pre con meetings will need to take place. Permits will be obtained by Schoell & Madson, Inc. 45. The developer will address this issue 46. Private streets will be constructed to city standards. The developer will submit an inspection/soil report after construction has been completed. 47. Six foot wide sidewalks have been added to the plans 48. All of the rear yards of the proposed buildings are at least 3 feet higher than the HWL of the pond 49. The developer will address this issue 50. The memo has been received, and comments from Carver County have been addressed in the plan revisions 51. Plans for the proposed city utilities and street have been reduced to 22"x34` size. 52. A conservation easement shall be dedicated over Qutlot C 53. We look forward to working with city staff to resolve any drainage issues that may arise 54. A berm has been added to Lot 5 outside the wetland buffer The Wetland alteration permit was subcontracted out to IColhaug Environmental Services Company, and they have been working with the City to address any concerns. Please contact Mark Kjolhaug or Mike Deryuter at 952-401-8757 with any remaining issues that have yet to be addressed. If you have any further questions or comments regarding these responses, please contact Jerry Backman or myself. We look forward to working with the City through final approval. Sincerely, J= - Jared Jones, E.I.T. Schoell & Madson, Inc. CC: Pat Minger, Minger Construction Paul Moline, Carver Planning & Zoning x ` Y y' I NEWDOC 4 t 1 L . - Schoell & Madson, Inc. Planning • Engineering • Surveying i RECEIVED SEp 2 3 2005 CITY OF CHANHASSEN TO: City of Chanhassen DATE: 9-22-05 PROJECT NO.: 62641-047 7700 Market Blvd ATTENTION: Bob Generous PO Box 147 SUBJECT: Chanhassen West Business Park Chanhassen, MN 55317 We are sending you ® herewith ❑ under separate cover the following: ❑ Plans ❑ Specifications ❑ Prints ❑Reports ❑ Shop Drawings ❑ Change Order ❑ Samples ® Copy of a Letter ❑ Data Sheets ❑ Other Transmitted via: ®Mail ❑ Fax ❑ Will Call ❑ Hr. Messenger Service ❑ Overnight Delivery QUANTITY DESCRIPTION 1 Response letter to coun comments received 9-19.05 These are transmitted as follows: ❑ As Requested ❑ For Your Records ❑ For Your Use ® For Review and Comment REMARKS: Formal response to City of Chanhassen comments to follow SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. Jared Jones Direct Dial No. 952-847-9608 Copy To 10580 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 1,- Minneapolis, MN 55305 Office 952-546-7601 9 Fax 952-546-9065 www.schoelimadson.com F:IENG162641%0471omespondenoe\SWCD Comments 9-22-OSTransmittal -Bob Generous 9-22.doc n — Schoell & Madson, Inc. Planning • Engineering • Surveying I - . September 22, 2005 Paul Moline Carver County Water Management 600 Bast a Street Chaska, MN 55318 Re: SWCD Comments Chanhassen West Business Park Dear Paul, This letter is in response to the memo dated 9/19/05 from Carver County Water Management in regards to the Chanhassen West Business Park project in Chaska. Changes have been made to the plans based on comments in the memo, and our response is as follows: Stormwater Issues 1. The calculations for existing conditions should be resubmitted and show the effects of ponding in the northeast wetland The submitted calculations use sheet flow runoff from 35.74 acres to the southwest wetland, which is not representative of the Existing Drainage figure. The increase in runoff may have impacts on downstream and water quality treatment on site. ➢ The drainage figures and HydroCAD model have been revised to more accurately model where runoff from the site ends up. Please refer to the attached, updated storm report. 2. Water Quality calculations need to be submitted for review. ➢ The pond has been designed to NURP standards for water quality, the calculations of which can be found in the revised drainage calculations under the NURP rainfall event. In summary, 3.817 of (166,269 co of runoff enters the pond during the 2.60 rainfall, and the pond has 176,459 cf of dead pool storage available. Calculations on the sizing of raingardens to accommodate runoff from the median rainfall event in the Twin Cities area have also been submitted. Please refer to the attached exhibit. 3. Proposed CNs for greenspace should be raised to C type soils to account for the affect of compaction. ➢ The drainage calculations have been revised to reflect this change. 4. Downstream capacity of the southwest wetland (Outlot A) should. be submitted ➢ The survey provided to us does not contain enough information to determine the capacity of this wetland. In addition to a lack of topographical information from the interior of the wetland, the western boundary of the wetland is not located on the property. 10580 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 1 • Minneapolis, MN 55305-1525 Office (952) 546-7601 • Fax (952) 546-9065 www.schoel lmadson.com 5. The outlet of the northwest wetland (Ouflot 8) should be submitted. ➢ Information on the inlet from the northwest wetland to the storm sewer pipe along the western boundary has been added to the plans. 6. Rainwater Gardens/lnfiltration - Additional details are needed including. ➢ Documentation should be submitted for the volume provided for infiltration. Several basins are noted on the plans, but no calculations are provided • Calculations on the sizing of raingardens to accommodate runoff from the median rainfall event in the Twin Cities are included in an attached exhibit and spreadsheet. In general, the raingardens are sized using the assumption that roof drains will not be used, and that roof runoff will flow across the parking lot. Raingardens are proposed in as many locations as possible, but site conditions and landscape requirements restricted the size and number of raingardens, and as such, they are only proposed where practical. In some cases, the raingardens do not provide enough storage for runoff from the median rainfall event, but it was our opinion that some treatment is better than none at, all. ➢ Soils used (sand fill or rock rill, 50% clean sand, 25 % loamy topsoil, 25 % compost) • A note has been added to the landscape plan which specifies that this type of soil should be used for rain garden construction. ➢ Cross -sections • A typical rain garden cross-section has been provided on the details sheet. ➢ Erosion control blanket and type ➢ Timing of installation (after contributing area is stabilized). ➢ To reduce initial degradation of basins, It is recommended plugs, shrubs and grasses are used in addition to the `rainwater garden seed mix' • A note has been added to the landscape plan which details these items. _ Erosion Control: 1. Stable EOF's are needed for the proposed pond on site. The EOF should be clearly labeled on the plan and a detail is needed. The EOF can be stabilized with a turf re - enforcement mat or fabric and riprap. ➢ A EOF has been added to the plans, and a detail has been added to the grading plan. It shall be stabilized with a turf reinforcement mat. 2. Erosion control blanket should be specified in the Swale from the FES to the wetland along the west boundary of the site. The blanket specified should adequately protect the area from designed velocity and depth of Clow. The blanket and seed in the Swale should be installed within 24 hours of culvert installation. All blankets on the plan should be shown as a shaded area. ➢ The swale on the west side of the property has been removed and replaced with storm sewer, so an erosion control blanket will no longer be necessary in that area. 3. Erosion control blanket is recommended for the pond slopes from around 952 to 942 contours. All blanket on the plan should be shown as a shaded area. ➢ An erosion control blanket has been added to pond slopes and designated by a hatch pattern at all locations on the site. 4, Erosion note number 5 should include 2 tons of mulch per acre with seed for stabilization; seed alone is not considered stabilization. ➢ Note #10 on the SWPPP has been changed to reflect the addition of 2 tons of mulch per acre in addition to seeding for final stabilization, 5. All curb cuts need riprap and fabric or sod installed within 24 hours of curb installation. ➢ All curb cuts will have 10 CY of Class IV nprap added, and a note has been added to the grading plan and SWPPP. Erosion Control: 1. Temporary sediment basins are needed prior to disturbing upslope areas. The areas of temporary sediment basins should be labeled on the plan. A temporary outlet is needed for the pond; details should be provided. A temporary outlet could consist of a perforated riser and rock cone. Temporary basins are needed in the area of the proposed permanent stormwater pond; the SE comer of the site prior to discharging to the culvert under Galpin. ➢ Temporary sedimentation basins have been added to the plan in the locations requested, and are clearly labeled. The primary basin (the stormwater pond) will have a temporary outlet, and a detail has been provided on the details sheet. 2. The Wimco inlet control detail proposed will work for all curbside inlets. Any and all area inlets or drop inlets in -paved areas will need altemate controls/Wimco details. The engineer should check on alternate designs for Wimco-type inlet controls to fit the various type of inlets. ➢ A Wimco insert detail for circular manholes and catch basins has been added to the details sheet. 3. Additional inlet controls maybe needed for adjacent inlets on Galpin and Street A. ➢ A note has been added to the grading plan instructing the contractor to install Wimco-type catch basin inserts on all proposed catch basins on Galpin Court (formerly Street A) and on Galpin Blvd. 4. Silt fence will be needed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond the wetland. 5. Silt fence needed for Lot 5, Outlot B. 6. Silt fence needed north of berm in Lot 6 as there is a FES taking'water north off site. 7. Silt fence needed south of Lot 1. ➢ Silt fence has been added in these locations 8. Each building site will need perimeter controls once the streets are paved and rock exits will be needed as each lot is built -out. ➢ A note has been added to the grading plan detailing this requirement, and since each building will be developed and approved separately, it is likely that this requirement will be met at the time the buildings are built -out. 9. Type 1 and Type 2 silt fence locations need to be specified on the plan. Type 2 should be installed around all wetland areas and in the SE comer of the site to protect the culvert under Galpin. The SF should be extended along the South side to close the gap in the SF. ➢ The two types of silt fence have been added to the plans in the areas requested. SWPPP Review: Does the SWPPP Narrative: Identify the entity responsible for longterm O&M? o The Owners Association has been specified on the SWPPP Do plan sheets identify. Locations and types of sediment basins? o Sediment basin locations have been specified on the plans - Are Temporary Sedimentation basins: o Adequately sized? ■ - The major sedimentation basin on the site, the stormwater pond, is adequately sized to handle runoff from the entire site. The other sedimentation basins are small and will only treat a limited amount of water, but are oversized for the amount of area that wil Ibe draining to them. o Designed to prevent short-circuiting? ■ The sedimentation basin locations should prevent short-circuiting o Are outlets designed to remove floating debris? o Are outlets designed to allow complete drawdown? ■ The temporary outlet is detailed on the details sheet, and will be able = to remove floating debris and allow complete drawdown if installed. o Do outlets have energy dissipation? o Have a stabilized emergency spillway? ■ The SWPPP instructs the contractor to provide energy dissipation and a stabilized emergency spillway. - Does the wet sedimentation basin have a stabilized emergency overflow? o The pond has a emergency overflow stabilized with a turn reinforcement mat, and is detailed on the grading plan. Are wetted perimeters of ditches stabilized within 200 feet of surface water? o A note has been added to the SWPPP. There are no swales on the site as of the most current plan revision - Are sediment control practices established on down gradient perimeters? o Silt fence has been added to close any gaps on down gradients = Do stockpiles have sediment control and placed in areas away from surface waters? o A note has been added to the SWPPP instructing sediment control around any stockpiles the contractor may use. If you have any questions or wish to discuss any of these responses, please feel free to contact me at 952-847-9608. Sincerely, :7- ;E::i Jared Jones, E.I.T. Schoell & Madson, Inc. CC: Pat Minger. Minger Construction Aaron Mlynek, Carver SWCD Bob Generous, City of Chanhassen Lori Haak, City of Chanhassen 13 Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineering • Surveying * Planning TO: DATE: 9-- t —cs PROJECT NO.: ATTENTION: SUBJECT: q, ca� We are sending you (herewith ❑ under separate cover the following: (APlans ❑ Specifications [,Prints ❑ Reports ❑ Shop Drawings ❑ Change Order ❑ Samples ❑ Copy of a Letter ❑ Data Sheets ❑ Other Transmitted via: ❑ Mail ❑ Fax ❑ Will Call ❑ Hr. Messenger Service ❑ Overnight Delivery QUANTITY DESCRIPTION ' a ='tom l These are transmitted as follows: i' As Requested [ For Your Reoords ff For Your Use Vj For Review and Comment ❑ Other REMARKS: SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. Gerald L.13ackman Direct Dial No. 952-847-9620 Copy To: COY SSE RECEIVED E SEP 16 2005 CHANHMEN PLANMW OWT 10580 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 1 • Minneapolis, MN 55305-1525 Office (952) 546-7641 • Fax (952) 546-9065 www.schoelimadson.com SCANNED 13 Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineering - Surveying - Planning TO: DATE: P S I PROJECT NO.: 3&2-00 I ATTENTION: SUBJECT: a We are sending you [$herewith ❑ under separate cover the following: aPlans ❑ Specifications ❑ Prints ❑ Reports ❑ Shop Drawings ❑ Change Order ❑ Samples ❑ Copy of a Letter ❑ Data Sheets ❑ Other Transmitted via: ❑ Mail ❑ Fax ❑ Will Call ❑ Hr. Messenger Service ❑ Overnight Delivery QUANTITY DESCRIPTION These are transmitted as follows: Cr,As Requested �y For Your Records 2. For Your Use (9 For Review and Comment ❑ Other REMARKS: l SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. , X- m2Qga�-) Gerald L. Backman Direct Dial No. 952-847-9620 Copy To: 10580 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 1 • Minneapolis, MN 55305-1525 Office (952) 546-7601 • Fax (952) 546-9065 www.schoellmadson.com r 3 O C) �t r Z NEWDOC r -Schoell & Madson, Inc. `-� Engineering • Surveying • Planning TO: City of Chanhassen DATE: 7-14-05 1 PROJECT NO.: 62641-047 7700 Market Blvd ATTENTION: Bob Generous PO Box 147 pp SUBJECT: Chanhassen West�Afe4MLA4 144 t7— Chanhassen, MN 55317 We are sending you ® herewith ❑ under separate cover the following: ❑ Plans ❑ Specifications ❑ Prints ❑Reports ❑ Shop Drawings ❑ Change Order ❑ Samples ❑ Copy of a Letter ❑ Data Sheets ® Other Permit application Transmitted via: ❑Mail ❑ Fax ❑ Will Call ® 1 Hr. Messenger Service ❑ Overnight Delivery QUANTITY DESCRIPTION 10 Revised Prelimina Plats 1 8.5"x11" Prelim Plat These are transmitted as follows: ❑ As Requested ❑ For Your Records ❑ For Your Use ® For Review and Comment REMARKS: Call with questions SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. Jerry Backman Direct Dial No. 952-847-9620 Copy To 10580 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 1, • Minneapolis, MN 55305 Office 952-546-7601 9 Fax 952-546-9065 www.schoellmadson.com F:lENG162641%047kcoRespondencelTransn i tal - Bob Generous Platdoc ate® v� o, � Y MEWDOC h � a f M 07/12/2005 15:08 9523610723 EDEN 'TRACE PACE 01 Eden Trace Corporation 8156 Mallory Court Chanhassen, MN. 55317 FAX Phone: Faxphone: ZZ { CC: Date: -7-- t Z — n S Number of pages includirig cover sheet: From: Mark Undestad Phone: (952) 361-0722 Fax phone: (952) 361-0723 REMARKS: ❑ Urgent ® For your review ❑ Reply ASAP ❑ Please Comm- ent r DFSCRtPMOH; That part of -the East Hot€ (E 1/2) of the Southwost Quarter Sc o4). Section 16, Township 116 North, Range 23 We&% v ich ties S= uth of the North 1065.41 feet, westerly of the Cehtert'me of County State Aid Highway No. 19, and Noah of the South 100.00 feet;• ALSO That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 15, Township 116 North, Danger 23 West, lying westerly of the oentertine of County State Aid Highwoy No.. 19 end north" . of the centerrine of County State Aid Highway No. 18. Said proFeriy being- subject to easement for rwdrray Purposes for County State Aid Highway 19 and t o" State Aid Mgwwcy-1$. 07/12/2005 15:08 9523610723 EDEN TRACE PAGE 02 07/12/2005 TUB 14,18 FAX 952+470+9539 MINGR.R CONS' UCTION �fl011001 3 �l-07�3 i4m@m P.O. Box 236 -- Chanhasen, M nnesoro 55317 CONSTRUCTION,. ANC. (952) 470-1753 • Fax (952) 470--9539 g M 3n:e� �r.P n.A=: as Sm Iudi,ng cmmr paq�-- ATZMTXM . DESCRIPTION: That part of the ECSt Half (FE 1/2) of the Southeast Quarter Vies £ 1/4), Section 16, Township 116 North, Range 23 west, whTch South of the North 1005.41 feet, westerty of the cente�ne of County State Aid Highway No. 19, and North of the South 100.00 foot; • ALSO b That part of the Southwest Quartet of the Southeast Quarter of Section 15, Township 116 North. Range 23 west, lying wesWy of the centerline of County State Aid Highwoy No.- 19 and northcrty „of the cenresfne of County State Aid Highway No. Ia. Sdid Property being' Swbjoct to easement for rcadww Purposes for 00unty State Aid Highway 19 and County State Ad Highway -i$. r schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineering • Surveying • Planning TO: City of Chanhassen DATE: 7-7-05 1 PROJECT NO.: 62641-047 7700 Market Boulevard ATTENTION: Lori Hack Chanhassen, MN 55317 SUBJECT: Chanhassen West Business Park We are sending you ® herewith ❑ under separate cover the following: ❑ Plans ❑ Specifications ❑ Prints ❑Reports ❑ Shop Drawings ❑ Change Order ❑ Samples ❑ Copy of a Letter ❑ Data Sheets ❑ Other Transmitted via: []Mail ❑ Fax ❑ Will Call ® 1 Hr. Messenger Service ❑ Overnight Delivery QUANTITY DESCRIPTION 16 Wetland mitigation plans SX 11 These are transmitted as follows: ❑ As Requested ❑ For Your Records ❑ For Your Use ® For Review and Comment REMARKS: Please call with questions SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. Jerry Backman Direct Dial No. 952-847-9620 Copy To CITY OF CHANHASSEN DECEIVED JUL 0 7 2005 CRAM MEN PLANNING DEPT 10580 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 1,• Minneapolis, MN 55305 Office 952-546-7601 • Fax 952-546-9065 www.schoellmadson.eom G:1Docoments and SetdngsUared.11My DocumentslSMI Sheets\Transmittal Form - Letterhead.doe Schoen & Madson, Inc. Engineering - Surveying - Pianning CITY OF CNANHASSEN 13ECEIVED AL 0 7 2005 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEFT TO: City of Chanhassen DATE: 7-7-05 1 PROJECT NO.: 62641-047 7700 Market Boulevard ATTENTION: Bob Generous Chanhassen, MN 55317 SUBJECT: Chanhassen West Business Park 7 1 We are sending you ® herewith ❑ under separate cover the following: El Plans ❑ Specifications ❑ Prints ❑Reports ❑ Shop Drawings ❑ Change Order ❑ Samples ❑ Copy of a Letter ❑ Data Sheets ❑ Other Transmitted via: []Mail ❑ Fax ❑ Will Call ® 1 Hr. Messenger Service ❑ Overnight Delivery QUANTITY DESCRIPTION 16 Prelimina Plats These are transmitted as follows: ❑ As Requested ❑ For Your Records ❑ For Your Use ❑ For Review and Comment REMARKS: Please call with questions SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. Jerry Backman Direct Dial No. 952-847-9620 Copy To 10580 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 1,- Minneapolis, MN 55305 Office 952-546-7601- Fax 952-546-9065 www.schoelimadson.com QV)owrnents and SetUngsVaredt\My Documents\SMI SheetsMansmittal Form - letterhead.doc SCANt1ED NEWDOC z� v� M V . � r • C i , �� NEWDOC- City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 aff OF (952) 227-1100 CUSS To: Mark Undestad Ship To: Eden Trace Corporation 8156 Mallory Court Chanhassen, MN 56317 • 05 -d�J Invoice SALESPERSON DATE / ( 1 i \ \ TERMS KTM 1717105 n� upon receipt QUANTITY DESCRIPTION 1 1 \ \ 1 UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 83 Property Owners List within 5W of 8470 Galpi BIVd. (83 labels} v v Chanhassen West Business Park $3.00 $249.00 \ v TOTAL DUE $249.00 Make allcheckspayableZoa C -' -- nhassen Please wn�he follo, ng code on your check: Planning Case #05-23. If yo-i1have n�questions�concerning this invoice, call: (952)-227-1107. u THANK YOU FOR YOUR BUSINESSI $CANNIO I 4275 NOREX LLC 5354 PARKDALE OR MINNEAPOLIS , MN 55416.1603 GINO R TENACE & ROBIN S MARSH-TENACE 2557 BRIDLE CREEKTRL CHANHASSEN. MN M17.9372 CURTIS J & MARGARET A ZOERHOF 2530 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317.9372 DAVID E & MONICA L. KILBER 2470 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN. MN 55317.9369 TIMOTHY R CAHLANDER & KARLA B PLADSEN-CAHLANDER 2495 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN. MN M17.9369 MICHAEL C & KRISTIN M MATTSON 2660 BRIDLE CREEKTRL CHANHASSEN. MN SW17 -9372 FRANK J & REBECCA A LAENGLE 2440 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN. MN 55317.9369 JAY & FAITH M CUTLER 2430 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317.9369 STEVEN W & SARAH S DALE 2487 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317.9369 ROGER A & GAYLEEN M SCHMIDT 8301 GALPIN BLVD CHANHASSEN. MN 56317-8413 JEFFREY J & ANDREA R SEBENALER 2499 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317.9369 REILLY M DILLON & STEPHANIE G1MBLE-DILLON 2542 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN. MN 55317.9372 JEAANNE M LINDBERG 2480 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 66317 -W69 ALEXANDER D DONALDSON & ELETA M DONALDSON 2460 BRIDLE CREEKTRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -9369 CRAIG W & DANAAJOHNSON 2450 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN. MN 55317.9369 LEGEND HOLDINGS LLC CIO LEWIS 11750OLD GEORGETOWN RD APT 2202. ROCKVILLE , MD 20852 -2652 CHARLES L & BARBARA C NICKOLAY 2420 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN. MN M17.9369 SCOTT & AMY C KAEHLER 2380 BRIDLE. CREEK CIR CHANHASSEN. MN 55317-9338 JEFFREY A & CYNTHIA L OLSON 2620 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN. MN 55317.9372 SCOTT T MURPHY & LORI A BOETTCHER-MURPHY 2550 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -9372 STEPHEN D & PATRICIA V PETERS 2536 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -9372 ALAN W JR & CATHERINE D HECHT 2490 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN. MN 55317.9369 STEVEN G & DEBORAH A WATTS 25W BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -9372 THOMAS M & MARCIA A KLADEK 2491 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -9389 WILLIAM G & KAREN N LOOMIS 2567 BRIDLE CREEKTRL CHANHASSEN. MN MI -9372 KARILYNN KIRMEIER 2410 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN. MN 65317 -9369 GENE M & BEVERLY G HERMES 2571 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN, MN M17 -9372 DANIELR & SHELLEY R LUNA SCOTTP & LESLIE M LOEHRER JEFFREY L & HANNAN R CROMETT 2483 BRIDLE CREEK TRL 2370 BRIDLE CREEK CIR 2471 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -9369 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317.9338 CHANHASSEN, MN 65317 -9369 CLARENCE E & LIEVA L SCHMIDT CRAIG V & NINA F WALLESTAD 2461 BRIDLE CREEK TRL 2475 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN, MN M17 -9369 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.9369 THOMAS J RADERMACHER & PAUL M & CONSTANCE M PALMER JOELLEN ANTONSON RADERMACHER 2360 BRIDLE CREEK CIR 2479 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN M17 .W69 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9338 PETER & LUANN SIDNEY BARRY & MARY L LABOUNTY 2431 BRIDLE CREEK TRL 2421 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN M17 -9369 CHANHASSEN , MN Ml7.9369 MARK & CHRISTINE FISCHER ANDREW M DINGMAN & 2407 BRIDLE CREEK TRL STEPHANIEJ DINGMAN CHANHASSEN , MN 65317 -9369 2403 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 RICHARD B BURY SAMUEL 0 & KIMBERLY A STIELE 4175 TRILLIUM LN E 2375 BRIDLE CREEK CIR MOUND, MN 55364 -7730 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.9388 JEFFREY 0 & REBECCA R BRICK CHARLES E & DIANA L KIRCHOFF 2365 BRIDLE CREEK CIR 2355 BRIDLE CREEK CIR CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.9338 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9338 WILLIAM G JR & PAMELA FRANZEN JAMES A & LAURIE LISIGNOI-I 2370 STONE CREEK LN W 2356 STONE CREEK LN W CHANHASSEN , MN M17 -7413 CHANHASSEN , MN 65317 -7413 LBI ACQUISrrION CORP CIO CHEF SOLUTIONS: L PETRICH 'TOM & SOMMANA MONTHISANE 20 N MARTINGALE 2381 STONE CREEK LN W SUITE 600 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.7413 SCHAUMBURG , IL 60173.2417 WILLIAM A & LORRAINE RODRIGUEZ DAVID G & YAEL M RUBIN 2357 STONE CREEK LN W 2345 STONE CREEK LN W CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.7413 CHANHASSEN , MN $5317.7413 THOMAS E & MARY K WITEK JEFFREY J & ABIGAIL M WILSON 2318 STONE CREEK DR 2332 STONE CREEK DR CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7403 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7403 ANGILBERTO HERNANDEZ & LAURIE HERNANDEZ 2451 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.9369 STEVEN J & NANCY J CAVANAUGH 2441 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 .W69 RODNEY H & JANICE C MELTON 2413 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 66317 -9369 CALVIN DISCHER 5476 WOODLAND RD MI NNETONKA , MN 55345 -5658 MERLE D & JANE VOLK 16925 CO RD 40 CARVER, MN 55315 -9635 KEVIN M & CATHLEEN A DILORENZO 2382 STONE CREEK LN W CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.7413 CHARLES O & ERIN M BUSALACCHI 2342 STONE CREEK LN W CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.7413 RICHARD B& CHRYSAUNAA BUAN 2369 STONE CREEK LN W CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7413 BRIAN C & SALLY L SNABS 2333 STONE CREEK LN W CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7413 MARK SUNDQUIST 2374 STONE CREEK DR CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.7403 JAMES D &TRACI L LEONARD 2360 STONE CREEK DR CHANHASSEN . MN 55317.7403 RODDY Y & LAURIE L W ZIVKOVICH 2337 BOULDER RD :. CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.7401 DANIELJ & PAMELAJ CULHANE 2333 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN . MN 55317.7401 JEFFREY J & KARLA M ALTHOFF 2326 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 7401 CHARLENE A STELA DER 2321 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7401 DONALD W & CATHY BORGMANN 2308 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 7401 DELORIS B HOLASEK LIVING TRUST CIO DELORIS HOLASEK 8610 GALPIN BLVD CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.9413 JOHN F & LAURIE SULLIVAN 2346 STONE CREEK DR CHANHASSEN . MN 66317.7403 THOMAS V & BEVERLY L ANTILLEY 2361 STONE CREEK DR CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7403 ALOTA PROPERTIES LLC 4035 NOREX DR CHASKA , MN 5018 -3043 KELLY K MORLOCK & SARA B ROMANSKI-MORLOCK 2325 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7401 JAMES M & JENNIFER D LARRANAGA 2318 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7401 RORY D & AMY J LEA 2313 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7401 SC07T T& NICOLE M BRUSH 2301 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN , MN 553I7-7401 RICHARD F RIEGERT CHASKA WATERTOWER MINI CIO RIEKER ENTERPRISES 7875 187TH ST 149 JONATHAN BLVD N BELLE pLAIN>; , MN 56011 -8932 CHASKA . MN 66318.2342 THE NORDICK GROUP ING 67512TH AVE NE WEST FARGO , ND 58078.3502 JOSHUA T KRIENKE~ & CHRISTINA A KRIENKE 2375 STONECREEK DR CHANHASSEN . MN 55317.7403 JOEL E & HEIDI M LEHRKE 2329 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN , MN 55317-7401 DOUGLAS VERNON JOHNSON 2322 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7401 DOUGLAS G & SARAH P HIPSKIND 2317 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7401 GERHARD & HELENE A SCHOCK 2309 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.7401 MICHAEL& JACQUELINE R MROSKO 2305 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN , MN 66317.7401 �� NEWDOC . r Z m�-- O � - ins a - NEWDOC CITY _OF- CHANHASSEN 7700'MARKET BLVD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 Payee: VOLK MINGER PROPERTIES Date: 09/.12/2005, Time: 12:37pm Receipt Number: EE / 6634 Clerk: BETTY DEV INSP WEST BUS PK, GIS LISTS PLANNING CASE 05-27, 05-23 ITEM REFERENCE AMOUNT --------------------------------------------- GIS PL CASE 05-27, 05-23, DEV INSP GIS LIST 495.00 DEV INSP 82.50 --------------- Total: 577.50 Check 2412 577.50 --------------- Change: 0.00 THANK YOU FOR YOUR PAYMENT! -a HS SCANNED CITY OF CHANHASSEN 05 7700 MARKET BLVD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 Payee: VOLK MINGER PROPERTIES Date: 09/07/2005 Time: 11:19am Receipt Number: DW % 6533 Clerk: DANIELLE .FINAL PLAT 05-23 CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS PARK ITEM REFERENCE AMOUNT --------------------------------------------- DEVAP FINAL PLAT 05-23 USE & VARIANCE 250.00 Total.: ---------------- 250.00 Check 2410 250.00 Change: --------------- 0.00 THANK YOU FOR YOUR PAYMENT! ScAnuw i r, r K • NEWDOC 1 f s r K '4s 1 f CITY OF CRIUMSEN 7700 Marks BakVUJ PO BOX. 147 Ctrs, MN 55317 Administration PtM952227.1100 Fax %M7.1110 Building Inspections Pt=952227.1180 Fax952.227.1190 Engineering Ptm%2227.1160 Fa>c952227.1170 Finance Piqua 952227.1140 Fax 952227.1110 Park & Recreation Ptx)e: 952.227.1120 Fax 952227.1110 Reaeation emV 2310 Cow Bw6evard RM 952227,1400 Fax MM7.1404 Planning & Natural Resources Pt=952227.1130 Fax%2.2P7.1110 Public works 1591 Park Road RM 952.227.1300 F2X952227.1310 Senior Center Pl=%2227.1125 Fax 952.227.f110 Wets Site www4fttMsM= December 22, 2005 Mr. Mark Undestad Eden Trace Corporation 8156 Mallory Court Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Development Notification Sign Escrow Refund Chanhassen West Business Park - Planning Case #05-23 Dear Mr. Undestad, Enclosed please find a check in the amount of $100 the development notification sign escrow for the ab If you have any questions, feel free to contact me kmeuwissen@6i,6hanhassen mn.us IMMUMM tts a refund of project. i 952 2271 1107 or by email at SCANNED The City of Chanhassen • A growing gssaiity schools, a demirig domtown. LY* txd e s winding trails. and beauti5t! parks, Ago place to I"rre. work, And play. z Vendor: EDEN TRACE CORPORATION Vendor No: EdeTra Vendor Acct No: Invoice Np—mh DateDescription DW6277 12J1912005 Sign escrow -Chan West Bus Park L�J Check Date. 12/22/200S Check Amount: S100.00 Invoice Amount 100.00 V L 2???0v 1:09 100 5 L5?I: 00 25?11=7?3 1 21" a 1 - a e . •_ ' a NEWDOC Z� m� . r .i �. NEWDOC w ti• Im 3 Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineering *Surveying -Planning TO: S DATE: -o PROJECT NO.: ATTENTION: c� - SUBJECT: We are sending you ❑ herewith ❑ under separate cover the following: ❑ Plans ❑ Specifications• ❑ Prints ❑ Reports ❑ Shop Drawings ❑ Change Order ❑ Samples ❑ Copy of a letter ❑ Data Sheets ❑ Other Transmitted via: ❑ Mail ❑ Fax ❑ Will Call ❑ Hr. Messenger Service ❑ Overnight Delivery QUANTITY DESCRIPTION These are transmitted as follows: i!— As Requested Cp For Your Records a For Your Use For Review and Comment ❑ Other REMARKS: SEP U 6 201)b CITY OF CHANHASSEN SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. GeraL. Backman Direct Dial No. 952-847-9620 Copy To: CITYOF CHMHASSEN RECEIVED SEPo62m awoIASSo PtAtaZ min 10580 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 1 • Minneapolis, MN 55305-1525 Office (952) 546-7601 • Fax (952) 546-9065 www.schoellmadson.00m ItC,ARWED CITY OF CHANHASSEN - RECEIVED 0 6 2005 } p " CHANHASSEN PLAWNG DEPT : That part of the East Half (E1/2) of the Southeast Quarter (SW1/4). Section 16. Township 116. Range 23 West, which lies South of the North 915.41 feet, westerly of the centerline .of County State Aid Highway No. 19, and North of the South 100.00 feet, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the County Recorder,. Carver County, Minnesota. ALSO That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 15, Township 116 North, Range 23 West, lying westerly of the centerline of the County State Aid No. 19 and northerly of the centerline of County State Aid Highway No. 18. Sold property being subject to easements for roadway purposes for County State Aid Highway 19 and County State Aid Highway 18, according to the. plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the_ County Recorder, Carver County. Minnesota. Excepting from the first parcel described above the following; All that part of the South 150.00 feet of the'north 1065.41 feet of the East Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 16. Township 116. Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota lying westerly of the centerline of County State Aid Highway 19, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the. County. Recorder, Carver County, Minnesota SCANNED ITEMS RE UIRED FOR FINAL PLAT CONSIDERATION (6/9104) The following items are required to be submitted a minimum of three (3) weeks prior to City Council meeting and payment of a $250.00 final plat review fee: 1. Submit three (3) sets of construction plans and specifications for staff review and redline. The construction plans and specifications shall be in accordance to the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications & Detail Plates. The plans shall include traffic signage and street light placement. Utility plans shall show both plan view and profiles of all utilities (sanitary sewer, water and storm sewer lines). Grading and drainage plans shall show dwelling type and elevations, wetlands and wetland buffer areas; stormwater, pond NWLS and .HWLS, catch basin, and storm manhole numbers. 2. Drainage calculations for water quantity -and quality ponding with maps showing drainage areas for pre -and post -development conditions and contributing areas to catch basins. 3. Tree Preservation Easements (if applicable). 4. Trail Easements (if applicable). 5. Landscape Plan and Cost Estimates (Woodland Management Plan, if applicable). t Zot oaab 6. =Engineer's Cost Estimate of Public Improvements: a. Sanitary sewer system. b. Water system. _ tZtl j>t e. t, C. Storm sewer drainage system including cleaning and maintenance. 34�ooO d. Streets, sidewalk and trails.- '7S,,5oo e. Erosion control. t Q, t ocao f. Site restoration (seeding, sodding, .etc.). t'3po o g. . Site grading t'z•5�000 g cad a 7. Ten (10) sets (folded) of final plat, one (1) set of reductions (81/z' x II"), a digital copy in Awg format (AutoCAD compatible), and a digital copy in .tif format. ✓. V 10. Digital -copy of the legal description of the property in a .doe or .pdf compatible format. Lot tabulations , 1." • = 200' scale paper or mylar reduction .of the final plat with just street names and Lot and Block numbers. Failure to provide any of - the above items by the required deadline will result in delaying consideration of final plat before the City Council. SA=$VOr=Vnlpnat submittan.doc SCANNED PROJECT INFORMATION TOTAL SITE AREA: SITE S.F. - 1,748.718 S.F. / 40.15 ACRES TOTAL S.F. r 166.233 S.F. ASPHALT w 42.123 Sf. BUILDING - 50.265 S.F. SIDEWALK - 1.390 S.F. GREENSPACE - 72.455 S.F - 44% LQT 4 TOTAL S.F. - 219,215 S.F. ASPHALT - 62.137 S.F. SOLOING - 40,526 S.F. SIDEWALK - 1.933 S.F. GREENSPACE 114.619 S.F - 52% LOT 7 TOTAL S.F, - 82,385 S.F. ASPHALT - 41.126 S.F. BUILDING w 23,124 S.F. SIDEWALK + 2,864 S.F. GREENSPACE - 15,271 S.F w 197. LOT 2: TOTAL S.F. - 144,036 S.F. ASPHALT w 50.237 S.F, BUILDING - 46.982 S.F. SIDEWALK - 2.122 S.F: CREENSPACE - 44.695 S.F - 31% LQT s. TOTAL S.F. 156.190 S.F. ASPHALT - 50.467 S.F, BUILDING - . 41.689 S.F. SIDEWALK - 1.739 S.F. GREENSPACE - 62.295 S.F - 407. LQT � TOTAL S.F. - 97.843 S.F. ASPHALT - 41.068 S.F. BUILDING w 25.914 S.F. SIDEWALK w 3.588 S.F. GREENSPACE - 27.273 S.F 28% 11 MAXIMUM OF 70% HARD SURFACE COVERAGE - AVERAGE FOR ENTIRE SITE MIN:MUM OF 30% GREENSPACE - 1.748.718 TOTAL SITE S.F. X 30% - 524,615 S.F SITE HAS $55.302 S.F OR 49% - MEETS REQUIREMENTS TOTAL R N P A AREA (ENCLUOF QUTLOT A 649.695 S.F 44% PARKINg-PEOMDED 552 SPACES LOT 3 TOTAL S.F. - 124.349 S.F. ASPHALT r 65.073 S.F. BLALOtNG - 27.899 S.F. SIDEWALK . 2.165 S.F. GREENSPACE 29.212 S.F - 23% LOT 6: TOTAL S.F. r 257.813 S.F. ASPHALT - 75.883 S.F. BUILDING - 77.754 S.F. SIDEWALK w 4.663 S.F. GREENSPACE - 99.513 S.F - 39% QQTLOT A; TOTAL S.F, - 180.643 S.F. QUTLOr 81 TOTAL S.F. - 92.577 S.F. QVILIaTQ TOTAL S.F; - 165,365 S.F. CUL--OE--SAC: TOTAL S.F, - 62.069 S.F. SITE PLAN REQUIRELAEL115: 50' BUILDING & PARKING SETBACK ALONG GALPIN BLVD, AND LYMA14 BLVD. - NO REQUIREMENTS FOR 1NTEMOR SETBACKS LANDSCAPING F BUFFER N • (ALONG PROPERTY LLNES) EAST & SOUTH YARDS - PROVIDE 1007. OF REQUIREMENTS WEST & NORTH YARDS - PROVIDE 75% OF REQUIREMENTS WEST, 5QUtH & EAST_YAROS REOULRE FOR EACH 100 L.F, OF PROPERTY; 2 CANOPY TREES. 4 UND£RSTORY OR ORNAMENTAL OR 6'EVERGREEN TREES & 6 SHRUBS, NORTH YARD -REQUIRES, FOR EACH 100 L.F, OF PROPERTY. 5 CANOPY TREES, 10 UNDERSTORY OR ORNAMENTAL OR 6' EVERGREEN TREES & 15 SHRUBS; NEW_80ULFVA8Q REQUIREMENTS; (STONE. CREEK CUL-DE-SAC) i CANOPY TREE EVERY 30' CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED SEP062005 CHMHASSE'V l'LANNrNG DEFT SCANNED MMT i OF 2 SHEETS . . .SCANNED - - SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS SCANNED c to "— o y� NEWDOC. s' [' i R[ s a a P e.:.' ¢"v„x a •.! 4 R i• P♦ r Y'-. x k e �e w A - 3 -. w a. x r.. r d> • A i.s --x M 4� w Y � i a. a u. i a n . w T b. I, a . •�,v. / S T I3t�e: r� I 'r ji Y i : iHIMtr. C!'2r.raC FIRST A djc. S2 -0 IS C cp Z s Za rn Cl) cp Cl)Cl) let 11 �r ; ;i l i I s Y Y a)0 ms m z Q� cn cn .z Nw�• z� m.� o.� ti • ti NEWDOC 4. d 10 PRELIMINARY PLANS FOR: CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS PARK CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA PREPARED FOR: EDEN TRACE CORP. - TREE PRESERVATION, SITE, STREET, GRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL, SANITARY SEWER, WATERMAIN, STORM SEWER, WETLAND MITIGATION AND LANDSCAPE TNC CONTRACTOR S-AU A..I ALL PALW MMES FOR [ 4ALsrEt ORwO "Ko SSYRyC"OKS ctc c=iNC TaQ ipN 14".. SMALL kCPAdk OR KAA&A ME ARCK WHEN OAMAGEo M--Q c(My LCTov AT NO COST PO THE OsT m •'AJ, Er t� ;; CEiANjiASSEN%ooj � a .w 1 r •,t4 �`�oo fPE�u`�xo.saL �L,r�.,..,, asp , L-NPSS�•A: AA.PJ•L".Q' y,v _ "!f y'�• T .",yam ,�Y h h_ ��!�R fib Tf • 5 h'• �% �A'wL:`n7tV..� w •�:n7,EC .R•�" ��f• .;4 "`ems iv3vr-Sa .A . 9. + LS�W °� . o:f ��r,•",'• "-"�W,^ �i�,• �;",ix`w� '•' s ) �v',✓d,. � 1l,fj rsK,� •',.jir :.a Yen rAlw :,, Itill �� LOCATION MAP No VALE SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNERS SOIL TESTING • ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 10580 WAYZATA BOULEVARD MINNETONKA, MINNESOTA 55305 SHEET INDEX 7, TAU SHM t. MIU4 0ONW*4 ►LAN 7. TREE MSERYATCN PLAN. MR REFERENp; OILY. d. OREE MSWATCN DUALS- FOR RCFLRENCE ONLY S. PRELL@NARY SRL PLAN S, ►KLRAINARY ORAOtNO ►LAND- FOR REFERENCE ONLY EL 7. ►RMWARY OKRA" MLAY ". POR kulftcNDE CNLY L PJ LIC STKM SMOARY SEWER k WATER -MIN PLAN k ►RWILE R. ► "A STOW SEWER PLAN k PROFLE M WCUW WIMTCN PLAx It. EEYAL.S T2, LANDSCA►E PLAN Ty. 014SCA►L MAL.S Td, L0406 PLAN TS,, ST A WATER PWMION HTVC VW"(SWOP►) d KKV COW W TNK PLAN WAS PK►AR0 NY ME OR uaXlt Mr pSVPERMi4 KCT 0a ANp AM A My CKINC R MNOER rK, LASWS qP THE STAIL�L q MINK$QVA, CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED SEP 0 G 2005 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT i of 15 Ne".an at:mow �.-�,.� ✓•� � i� i � � s' i�_n �4�"'QI! :s"� •�a��:"^"'._,;:,r�js' Z—Z AN �� 5 �.�+; ;•,•,•,•,•`��L ri-s �� _fr� �d � �'. t s 4�—a� /j-°� •�Ifl,y`%r"n.+., lJ'""'•""".d'fl /. I�l'/i"t 3' \ Yf .�: . r+�� ;[[[}Y �i :): 1 `: r!• ' F� • i . l� S S �� t i sue. ,•, � ip i fill or •� r ,� � iyy'. 4 � i ]��i�•. � 1 � • 1 `� 4' t s t f i_ \ T\ ,t. 41 LIZ L 72 1t E `� 1 �Fi �� :� i � J.: .. 'T•. L 3 �'^�tl��L':�..l.. e^.`R "r�.•.•.• ..•�• g. �} �j � 4y }; } I Y . f e'er •� � �`' �! �'�. �� - I .�S Z,R � 1 I q9' y Ix iii A. } • Till i Q .. - i [title goo _ - ttttr tttt� t t O 01.1 �� •.� \ ,\ nm WIN .�� ++f YS 1 • PIN Mi�A; "• \ . �- Nr .tip s�� %��y �-,•,,• r r l �� SO $� i;� ��Cs< 3N « � 4 � irr't }r:��7 's6f`: ai � � k � x � � _� Y 4 W All � O � . ` i� � � � �` s,- lop illl k# x 1 f, P, low art/ i . q LL Y le Y a ly I LLJ a I Nxac rill 3 ,4, rts.a NI ti .. • � i - ' - � l��i rev.+ • E 08» N s \ ••�•• ,.! /t ! - it 1 t t E t �. �T�:•. , :•.•,•.•.•i t I �/ .• •• ,;.��,. ,.. � Icy € � --�4 ,�� _ � t h - .{'.:'�'• 1 . I i# ss'ca 'i Est! YYir Y x Yy: 3_ 3 rryy� gtif €%tEgS¢ a k dfil R yf gEi pa� : qy 5 i J t _ = a 4E : : fR+j lit�!11 pq i 11 �� i��'�r$ � II � �¢ Till Ill h I m 11 YI i� � � g �� _ �� t ill IgIIN it RWEI il!7- r 5.1111 � �{� i � =I ••g s d # � aS � ¢ 3� I- F 3 � 1� ' i �� r3� � � � E•F 3�g13t� R ci �#� �r g • �� _ � � �•� �: � � � g 11 �E 9911 ' �� s i? ¢. Nil �M • � � 3 4}. i ■� ;ids a 1 i INC a t r a 1 ,�ti .�erg 'f ' 3s Hip s f� $ Y $ i11a T €l!! 1a; 'w111!csi > i- fs _f 'Xxa Y t : 'a a iaY i`• a ;a I? € 14'I'l € . " f� 3 8 •a 1 s € i i y rw. s %hill x q a i iiY l i I:YY ni ayc $ sz t Y i� I� py ..'R€a� s, rx :a i=�a�i s '� ;!7 3� � a:•si��s �S�x: a €s � is €� � IIe� Y � y r fill Y � Ha 11� lilt 1111111 �� . JU Li LU �-• a O .iti z O m A n if If �F r r I ;)l • 1 Iiq y•yn \. r I., •� r � ! it Jill r, 1 / .szj• ` J H r 2" r�s y I ; 1 ram- fit i1 �� ..-- � E• T + YT 22 2i Jri_ ■. 'i at r• / r 1 jig It c' =x J 11 r fit r a e X � S. � =w `� ►� g ii€ fit\ f y�1i =;FN Y 5 y l Yjs Y Fss qYa Y.#.1,611 !X: •q E} # 5y :ygg T aj Y R;E aEDg„�RER EFL .E iY Yx Y Ea s�x��#Y4;Y96.P�Ya Es ; 'Jill ! a Y [ g4 t f e o {6 E §y�# s R egg ¢ 3BR= yr x X sn'iS6[? Q �� ## E [ pg p$ Y y � � �lllf II ��•.. - � r E N V;J CO ! ! i f i W� t y or "`sue Xk�� Y1Yi yrY 1�m to r ''YFrI 470E3'G[ 1W�d iYd 6Z2St 90W.1316 Yaz7$�mppZ[Ys offIN' i f "f aaw ..,....n'w..»..:..ro. $ ,..w:..... R ,.......�.v. -c [its lit 1S s enc."! g Y g 898 P 4 � 9 E /I JJ • S'40t�'CSS��'Ytd4tYSr£�.i95'b"D'D�M�l10Gtt � r r 4 IF LL �, 64 ! 4I Fig., � iiili F! l�3ili ! gPal .. i 3333.... j€€S1j J ! �3fi ij! � •• Ze F {$i i hI iR hq P P a a y `H I:+u. y{1} v �liil F i j fill i it#.r• , • t Sr a� i OWN o e j r 1 ' #! f �s'rli! j'a�i � I w r- M Pi F-�iir tj rQa'ndW=� ' r! i 11.1 till i .ss tz•. �_ rTu 4�. ood uu� Ni "ot g j gri.35 fill i t,tz t", .21ii i; • ' •F - en , i 1k4 1}151 �iil 11 t # i111111111 eule ten 11111 1111 its 115 ae� Fi 494E8'�3.iiVx'd'Wdilb'>LSODZI91b'�+�P�ld?II3 ti �N d = x T � as ; a Su �ii3asa3$i€€g€ +- A isr�as :a lip ;?x a a c f i g 3 II i R z r � Ll It a33 it I€ 4r^ gg R 7t� !jil1 i I I I I I hill = 11 1 4 _ tiEstj�. C) a v '• �� fir, �,�. � � � rrr � ��\� � ` .a.: �•+,•i•.'O. .".;.;.;.;.;.�� - :-tea- � '� _f Y 3, .:."f_.•� - ti.. 56068'C[ 16�d �9d 1[.sY�£ fA0Z131b.'�+W's1�4 �E tit i � ';fisg ca Yi 13 � Yt� i gtM �Y ow �a� } x z , q, 4 a `- a. F yr 9n i,a,re 0068' 1 Wed'Nl4001 9ODU9uV'3q'b1!c i3"Is lip + jM S d � yi Su # az ILJU � a 1! 3$• i 4 t�i « s is r i lit i m c > .....:�....;��•'.;,,,� � , ate.. + �'"'�►e.�+-,, U rye. mo Ct ?e-d ud Wirt EOp2191616+w F 0. W 28 az U s -i J �+ $ o ¢ r F ,fir $fit ' 'Yer �Ia ` ,€ Ill 7 eb i3rY� sRFi•� Y� 3 T� DS a �� aaIOU IY ¥g iY � F; I s 7 y i Isis H1 IM d Ia:111i191 11, • rib oar• VV= ASS mot ra« � � y oil �Y�� ` 7b �lit,.: 1[* l 1 p€ i �" r b� s � i� D a I ¢ts }b�q€� �! Y EY Ili iYia gl Yp• yy s� 3Yy ■nY S Y a ;,jig kill F4 lit 1y1 t#;_ t THIN, P �1fig?[ 1c� �aiie� Yq`� 1. a 1, 1 1 �Irl is lt S Y 1yy�■� t #a s"' ;e" g�#'s .ji'Ft rat a ill Rl"ir SS fill, J11;jK � � q $a.p �- � ��s �� F jill fill, ollf�17 IT, , -;; ti tg 111549� lii1"ig �! I[a�.1E•1 It�:��. BEt� �1� y�lp �'� �dsT� �F� yESR ■ff��.s i� �. S€� �a �b �# r r r r • r r ♦ r f ! ! S _ _ t IN ! S TIt ■ ITT ju via It all t iitg1$ N EWD-OC z n r,X� wms KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That Merle D. Volk and Jane Volk, husband and wife, fee owners, of the following described property situated in the County of Carver, State of Minnesota, to wit: That part of the East Half (E1/2) of the Southeast Quarter (SW1/4), Section 16, Township 116, Range 23 West, which lies South of the North 915.41 feet, westerly of the centerline of County State Aid Highway No. 19, and North of the South 100.00 feet, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the County Recorder, Carver County, Minnesota. ALSO STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this Daniel G. Nickols, Land Surveyor. Notary Public, County, Minnesota My Commission expires , 20 COUNTY SURVEYOR, Carver County, Minnesota day of , 20 , by That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 15, Township 116 North, Range 23 West, lying westerly of the centerline of the County State Aid No. 19 and northerly of the centerline of County State Aid Highway No. Pursuant to Chapter 395, Minnesota Laws of 1971, this plat has been approved this day of 18. Said property being subject to easements for roadway purposes for County State Aid Highway 19 and County State Aid 20 Highway 18, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the County Recorder, Carver County, Minnesota. Excepting from the first parcel described above the following; By John E. Freemyer Carver County Surveyor All that part of the South 150.00 feet of the north 1065.41 feet of the East Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 16, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota lying westerly of the centerline of County State Aid Highway 19, according CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the County Recorder, Carver County, Minnesota Have caused the same to be surveyed and platted as CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS PARK and do hereby donate and dedicate to the public for public use forever the highways, circle, and also dedicating the easements for drainage and utility purposes only as shown on the plat. In, witness whereof said Merle D. Volk and Jane Volk, husband and wife, have caused these presents to be signed this day of , 20 . SIGNED: Merle D. Volk and Jane Volk, husband and wife. By Merle D. Volk By Jane Volk STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this the husband and wife Notary Public, County, Minnesota My Commission expires , 20 day of ,20 ,by of Merle D. Volk and Jane Volk, I hereby certify that I have surveyed and platted the property described on this plat as CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS PARK; that the plat is a correct representation of the survey, that all distances are correctly shown on the plat in feet and hundredths of a foot; that all monuments will be correctly placed in the ground as shown, in accordance to Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.02, Subd. 1; that the outside boundary lines are correctly designated on the plat and that there are no wet lands as defined in Minnesota Statutes Section 505.02, Subd. 1 or public highways to be designated other than as shown. Daniel G. Nickols, Land Surveyor Minnesota License No. 19839 This plat of CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS PARK was approved and accepted by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held this day of , 20 and is in compliance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.03, Subd. 2. All monuments are set as specified by the City Council and as stated on this plat, according to Minnesota Statutes, 505.02, Subd. 1. CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA By , Mayor By COUNTY AUDITOR , Clerk I hereby certify that there are no delinquent taxes paid for all years prior to 20 for land described on this plat and transfer entered. Dated this day of , 20— Mark Lundgren, Carver County Auditor M COUNTY TREASURER I hereby certify that taxes payable for the year 20 for lands described on this plat as CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS PARK have been paid this day of , 20 Tom Kerber, Carver County Treasurer M COUNTY RECORDER I hereby certify that this plat of CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS FARK was filed this day of 20_ _ at o'clock _M. as Document Number Kelly Hanson, Carver County Recorder By CITY OF CH RECEIVE,) EN SEP 0 6 2005 CHANHASSEN PANNING DEFT SCHOIELL & M ARSON, INC. ENGINEERS * SURVEYORS * PLANNERS SOIL TESTING * ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES r—, L_J Pyl Lr a; 00 N O L0 ui in N -rr r,-r-rr- /<� lFR N8915'580W - 702.98 / N89'08'31 "W / SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH 1065.41 FEET OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SEC. 16, OUTLOT B 5 r�T]lr'r' 1 1 ILJL_ 1279.65 - - 1229.63 - - 83.81 S89'08'31 "E .l �,�, r - Tr, 1 V I Ii 1 .i•LJI ---- 442.85-- N89.08'31 "W v O O LO 50 CHANHASSEN NI►N OUTLOT C NII Oip � SOUTH LINE 3 w� L- OF THE NORTHEAST OF Do .I I 'N \\ THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER , r- I1 D O� I p a, l \\ I Ni N I W tt rn N I `�- \ I N;U P c0 N N89'31'55"E 508.68 I r I a w $ I x I D o on V 4 0� z LO W ¢m I ILO x� F � N a� W _ w �w N Op w ZOf J w F v a L- _� — — 378.84 2 \ N Y L v I Wto I \\\6S2Sf M M ryh L i 0 \ 9 II ry aj ^ 99 a69. 2 ,3S = 18� R 6po D/y N83'34'03"E 112.14 NM U '15.hp L=34.13 7 _ A=32'35'14" 116.84 n � O N 67 •5 54"- \79 Z I _ 350 t- ?AN LA 0 . c� N 1 v�6� ry0 to wt'a 00 ---�L_— 197.92 — _ 576.76 N89'31'55"E \y Co LO OUTLOT A \ t/ !� r 446.56 /I \ \ I CENTERLINE OF CO. RD. NO 18— \\ N �\ \ R=868.51 L=124.39 CC.S. /` H. 1 - A=8'12'22" \_ CB=S85'25'48"W S00'29'13"E i 100.02 1 514.97 �+- 1 0 276.87 v .10 I1 I J► II �j 0c;, I 23800ls 1 O 1 L-' 4' LAW. ! `s •1_ oll� 1 _ t0 1 I r I1� �� _v I L' to 11 tFT r4 1 ' O° rn L�1 c;s N II / cry 1 Oros 273� CC I Vic; - \ 53.9J CiLL I .y $7920 25"W C CR 327.62 0.0 ' W M I �O �' `Y — �9.Og•25 , V 1019 1-= I I �° a ° J �� C�7 w— I N t 1 L N<� 1 OW 11 �p En (6 tP J Q 1 4 w ', `� I � OI 1 too Lo w 1 C N U) 1 I I 1 Oil wl0 o ! \ I • 50 50 I �Y y5 .FjS� 4� pQ��iT I .?- / C.S.A.H. NO 18 I I �Dc• 9�j1 3�3 6`O`9 J� Iv jt, i / 0 A C\a 33 SO C I --N8900'92 1017 _�� 101�8 i I_57 3 \ I �� W i 23'24 g ?S• 61 \ NO* 18) LYM AN BLVD. ern K ` N 1 1 �0�0 �0, N3 60 v i� *y3 5Cb / v`r - 7 V gA gIZ) aCV tp. '1�Ilk. lAO l v \ 5g O0 \ v."1.2[?--23 °h 4� s Ci �0 44 3S 4�7 ft � i Z� �a 50.53 _ S00031'13"E `� �\\moo S S 4 1303.51 23 o N89'15'26"W N00'31'13"W / I \mod R?99's 3S'Hr j 1303.57 100.02 \ 4 �8J8$ Xcl \ -- SOUTH LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST SE COR. OF SEC. 16, —-"•QBtiL, ` QUARTER OF SEC. 16, T. 116, R. 23 — SW COR. OF SEC. 15 — rI (CARVER CO. MON.) TY N S 100 0 50 100 200 (SCMZ IN FM • - Denotes 1/2-Inch found Iron monument O - Denotes 1/2-inch X 14 Inch set iron pipe marked by License 19839 - Denotes cast Iron monument (Carver County) No monument symbol shown on the plat indicates monuments to be set according to Minnesota Statutes and which shall be In place within one year of the filing of the plat. Bearings shown are based on the West line of the East Half of the Southeast Quarter of Sec. 16, T. 116, R. 23 having an assumed bearing of N 0 29*13' W. VICINITY MAP NO SCALE SEC. 15 & 16, T. 116 N., R. 23 W. Drainage and Utility Easements are shown thus: I-5 5 I-10 10-1 NO SCALE Being 10 feet in width and adjoining right-of-way lines unless otherwise indicated, and being 5 feet in width and adjoining lot lines, as shown on the plat. SCHOELL & MA®S vimI11va ENGINEERS * SURVEYORS * PLANNERS SOIL TESTING * ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES SHWT I rW "l, Coate-r a ' i NEWDOC m� �7r •• r f NEWDOC G 4 k_f FAX COVER SHEET = Date: :Company: Attention: D P� 7700 Market Blvd. - P.O. Box 147 Fax Number: C, 5 I , Z 9 r'7 - 561 ES Chanhassen, MN 55317 General Phone: 952 227-.1.100 Sent By: Lori Haak Adminlstrative Fax: 952-227-.1110 Phone: 952.227.1135 Bldg/Inspections Fax. 952-227-1190 Engineering Fax: 952-227-1170 Direct :Fax: 952.227.1935 Park/Recreation Fax. 952-227-1110 " Planning Fax: 952-227.1110 Public Works Fax: 952.227.1310 Recreation Center Fax: 952-227-1404 Sending pages, including cover page. ❑ For your information. WebAddress: www.ci chanhassen.mn.us ❑/ please find the .information you requested. Please review and call me. &0j C;y co(lP 4 -PV C- - ko-oL GG: Apty 0--'-6 req we, ono cewt f k4e- vej M? ' iA ma-h%0', e J2 t-e C ec yed 00,1" 44 a -re. nt 4 fro o-5i fo vs(- aa.M � CA, S e 6,011J17�5 0 A C'� h acre- a cla f?o- If you do not receive all pages, or are experiencing -other problems in transmission, please call Lori at the number listed. i at 'LA. 3L r KjoLHAuGENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES COMPANY 1■r`/sd �xQrsor Memorandum Date: July 28, 2005 To: cc: From: Re: Lori Haak, City of Chanhassen Jerry Backman, Schoell & Madson, Inc. RECRFirg JUL 2 9 2005 Clrr0FCt1,,#, EP' Melissa Barrett, Kjolhaug Environmental Services Company MnRAM Functional Assessment — Chanhassen West Business Park This memo is being submitted to document existing and predicted wetland functions and values for Wetland Basin F 130 and the proposed replacement area at the Chanhassen West Business Park site in Chanhassen, MN. Sequencing FlexibUi & Section 404 Flexibility The proposed impacts to Wetland 1 can be justified in part by sequencing flexibility (WCA) and Section 404(b)(1) flexibility guidance (Army Corps of Engineers). According to Minnesota Rules 8420.0520 (Sequencing), the local governmental unit may not consider or approve a wetland replacement plan unless the local government unit finds that the applicant has demonstrated that the activity impacting a wetland has complied with all of the following principles in descending order or priority: A. Avoids direct or indirect impacts to the wetland that may destroy or diminish the wetland; B. Minimizes the impact to the wetland by limiting the degree or magnitude of the wetland _ activity and its implementation; C. Rectifies the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected wetland; D. Reduces or eliminates the impact to the wetland over time by preservation and maintenance operations; E. Replaces unavoidable impacts to the wetland by restoring or, if wetland restoration opportunities are not reasonably available, creating substitute wetland areas having equal or greater public value 26105 Wild Rose Lane, Shorewood. Minnesota 56331. phone: 952401-8757, Fax: 952-401-8798 '-4( Flexibility in the application of these sequencing steps may applied (subject to conditions), as determined by the LGU if any of the following apply: 1. the wetland to be impacted has been degraded to the point where replacement of it would result in. a certain gain in function and public value; 2. preservation of a wetland would result in severe degradation of the wetland's ability to, function and provide public values, for example, because of surrounding land uses and the wetland's ability to function and provide public values cannot reasonably be maintained through other land use controls or mechanisms-, 3. the only feasible and prudent upland site available for wetland replacement or development has greater ecosystem function and public value than the wetland; 4. the wetland is a site where human health and safety is a factor Per Minnesota Rules 8420.0520, Subpart 7a., sequencing flexibility cannot be implemented unless alternatives have been considered and unless the proposed replacement wetland is certain to provide equal or greater functions and public values as determined based on a functional assessment reviewed by the technical evaluation panel using a methodology approved by the Board. Items 1 & 2 apply to the proposed impacts to Wetland F 1-30. Currently, Wetland F 1 30 is a Type l partially drained (tiled) isolated depression dominated by cattail located.in the center of a disturbed, fallow soybean field. Preservation of the wetland and its functions would be difficult in the context of a large business park development due to disturbance of the surrounding = watershed. The replacement wetland is designed to be a Type 1/2 temporarily flooded and:. saturated emergent wetland fringe dominated by a diverse mixture of native species adjacent to existing Wetland Basin F 51-80 South, in the southwest corner of the site. A MnIUW 3.0 functional analysis was completed for the wetland proposed to be impacted on the site (see Appendix A). The predicted replacement wetland would represent an increase in some and no change in. other functions and values compared to the existing wetland. Specifically, the projected replacement wetland would represent an increase in vegetative diversity and integrity, wildlife, and amphibian breeding habitat compared to the existing drained wetland. The MnRAM analysis found the existing wetland to rate moderate in hydrologic regime, flood storage, and downstream and wetland water quality based on its categorization as a depressional, isolated wetland. However, due to the maintained tile system, the hydrologic regime and flood storage capacity of the wetland has been degraded. Downstream and wetland water quality are also predicted to be low based on the presence of tile, which does not allow nutrients to be degraded. Based on these factors, we believe the overall rating for the existing wetland to be low. - The MnRAM predicted wetland consists of at least two separate community types with an overall vegetative diversity and integrity rating of low due to the presence of cattail, an invasive. However, the replacement wetland will be seeded with a mixture of grass and forb species, which r will likely produce an even more diverse vegetative community than the one projected by the MnRAM assessment. An elevated outlet within the predicted wetland will maintain hydrologic regime and flood storage capacity, which will also benefit downstream and wetland water quality allowing for an overall-mting of moderate. The WRAM analysis demonstrates that items 1 & 2 of Sequencing Flexibility applies to the proposed impacts to Wetland F 1-30. Wetland Community Summary Chanhassen West Business Park Vegetative Divers4lIntegrity Community Weighted Weiland Individual Highest Average Average Size CowaTdin Circular Plant Welland Community Welland Welland Weiland Welland ID Subwatershed (acres) lClassy7cation 39 Community Proportion Rating Rating Rating Rating 10-116-23-16-001-E I PEMCd Type 1 L!� Shallow, hallow, Open Water 85 10-1 16-23-16d-001-E I PEMCd Type 1 Fresh (Wet) Meadow Is 0.1 10-116-23-16-001-P 5 PEMCd Type 3 IShallow, Open Water 85 0.1 W.- ommani 10-116-23-16-001-P 5 PEMCd Type I _lFresh (Wet) Meadow 15 0.5 WETLAND F 1-30, EXISTING, 10-'116;-23-16-001-B WETLAND F 1-30P PREDICTED, 10-116-23-16-001-P *Denotes Incomplete calculation data. Tuesday, July 26,2005 Page I of I Wetland Functional Assessment Summary Chanhassen West Business Park Downstream Wetland Hydrologic Flood Water ;inter Shoreline Wetland lD Hydrogeomorphology Regime Storage Quality Quality Protection 10-1160-1$-001-E Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate NotAppkatle 10.11e-23.1e-001-A Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate NotAppBeatle Tuesday, July 26, 200S Page 1 of l e c. Wetland Functional Assessment Summary Chanhassen West Business ParV 10.110-23.16-001•E Low NotAppkable NotApp8ccable Low NotApplkable Cornbinatian Discharge, Recharge 10.116-23.16.001•P MOD NotAppAcable Low Low` NotApptcable Discharge PROPOSED WETLAND MITIGATION Schoei! & Madson, Inc. �..�� • syrvylnp • P1eru,rp 1*67W r1w wtaft m Etr� sr...oa �n►�oo pew vet zaoYs-�.txms�esoss Project Name/L_ocatim ' Wetland Mitigation Chanhassen West Business Park `lent Name: Eden Trace Corp: July S. 2005 60 SCALE SMI PROJECT # 62641-047 J i • ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ . ... . . . . . . . ..... • . . • • . ..• . . . • • • ♦ • f SCALE: ' HORIZ: 1 "=50' 960: . - ........ ........ PROPOSED SURFACE - .... .. ..... t 950 : :..• • PROPOSED- WETLAND AREA ll ...., ....` 1 . ........... � EXISTING l EXISTING GROUND ; \ : WETLAND AREA I !1 940:........ ......... ....... I1 j.1 :...` ._ .... ................ DATUM E`LEV • ' 930.00 co N 0) - o cn cfl o 0 0 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 x NEWDOC i • h • % � 1 kr i '1. ,. 4 KjoLHAuGENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES COMPANY saw C."5' Xa .'J iz..' Wu .. Memorandum Date: July 28, 2005 To: cc: From: Re: Lori Haak, City of Chanhassen Jerry Backman, Schoell & Madson, Inc. CF1UP� JUL 2 9 2005 CITY OF CHANHASSEN Melissa Barrett, Kjolhaug Environmental Services Company MnRAM Functional Assessment — Chanhassen West Business Park This memo is being submitted to document existing and predicted wetland functions and values for Wetland Basin F-130 and the proposed replacement area at the Chanhassen West Business Park site in Chanhassen, MN. Seguencing Flexibilill & Section 404 Flexibility The proposed impacts to Wetland 1 can be justified in part by sequencing flexibility (WCA) and Section 404(b)(1) flexibility guidance (Army Corps of Engineers). According to Minnesota Rules 8420.0520 (Sequencing), the. local governmental unit may not consider or approve a wetland replacement plan unless the local government unitfinds that the applicant has demonstrated that the activity impacting a wetland has complied with all of the following principles in descending order or priority: x A. Avoids direct or indirect impacts to the wetland that may destroy or diminish the wetland; B. Minimizes the impact to the wetland by limiting the degree or magnitude of the wetland activity and its implementation; C. Rectifies the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected wetland; D. Reduces or eliminates the impact to the wetland over time by preservation and maintenance operations; E. Replaces unavoidable impacts to the wetland by restoring or, if wetland restoration opportunities are not reasonably available, creating substitute wetland areas having equal or greater public value 26105 Wild Rose Lane, Shorewood, Minnesota 55331, Phone:952-401-8757, Fax: 952401.8798 Flexibility in the application of these sequencing steps may be applied (subject to conditions), as determined by the LGU if any of the following apply: l . the wetland to be impacted has been degraded to the point where replacement of it would result in. a certain gain in function and public value; 2. preservation of a wetland would result in severe degradation of the wetland's ability to function and provide public values, for example, because of surrounding land uses and the wetland's ability to function. and provide public values cannot reasonably be maintained through other land use controls or mechanisms; 3. the only feasible and prudent upland site available for wetland replacement or development has greater ecosystem function and public value than the wetland; 4. the wetland is a site where human health and safety is a factor Per Minnesota Rules 8420.0520, Subpart 7a., sequencing flexibility cannot be implemented unless alternatives have been considered and unless the proposed replacement wetland is certain to provide equal or greater functions and public values as determined based on a functional assessment reviewed by the technical evaluation panel using a methodology approved by the Board. Items 1 & 2 apply to the proposed impacts to Wetland F 1-30. Currently, Wetland F 1-30 is a Type 1 partially drained (tiled) isolated depression dominated by cattail located in the center of a disturbed, fallow soybean field. Preservation of the wetland and its functions would be difficult in the context of a large business park development due to disturbance of the surrounding watershed. The replacement wetland is designed to be a Type 1/2 temporarily flooded and saturated emergent wetland fringe dominated by a diverse mixture of native species adjacent to existing Wetland Basin F 51-80 South, in the southwest comer of the site. A MnRAM 3.0 functional analysis was completed for the wetland proposed to be impacted on the site (see Appendix A). The predicted replacement wetland would represent an increase in some and no change in other functions and values compared to the existing wetland. Specifically, the projected replacement wetland would represent an increase in vegetative diversity and integrity, wildlife, and amphibian breeding habitat compared to the existing drained wetland. The MnRAM analysis found the existing wetland to rate moderate in hydrologic regime, flood storage, and downstream and wetland water quality based on its categorization as a depressional, isolated wetland. However, due,to the maintained tile system, the hydrologic regime and flood storage capacity of the wetland has been degraded. Downstream and wetland water quality are also predicted to be low based on the presence of tile, which does not allow nutrients to be degraded. Based on these factors, we believe the overall rating for the existing wetland to be low. The MaRAM predicted wetland consists of at least two separate community types with an overall vegetative diversity and integrity rating of low due to the presence of cattail, an invasive. However, the replacement wetland will be seeded with a mixture of grass and forb species, which will likely produce an even more diverse vegetative community than the one projected by the MnRAM assessment. An elevated outlet within the predicted wetland will maintain hydrologic regime and flood storage capacity, which will also benefit downstream and wetland water quality allowing for an overall rating of moderate. The MnRAM analysis demonstrates that Items 1 & 2 of Sequencing Flexibility applies to the proposed impacts to Wetland F 1-30. Wedand Community Summary Chanhassen WestBusiness Park Vegetative Diversityltntegrity Wetland ID Subwaterslred Weiland Size (acres) Community Wetland Proportion Individual Community Rating Higlrest Wetland Rating Average Wetland Rating Welglited Average Wetland Rating Cowardin Class leation Circular 39 Plant Community 10-116.23-16-001•E 1 PEMCd Type 1 Shallow, Open Water Communities 85 0.1 10.116.23.16-001-E 1I PEMCd I Type 1 jFresh (Wet) Meadow 15 1 0.1 14116.23-16-001-E .. .., n:.::.,.- '..-.. <....« ..<,.,. 'Y.'.:f �.,.. .. «... �.,,--:, -.. ,KT,.. �� ::'., ♦.,. f, .., ..,f. ..x f, n., 4, �.F '.,.4nA 1 1 �pO ti W:3 h, ,h.., Lqw i� n.p�c1'e.f .�.. d e�S., 10.116-23.16-001-P 5 PEMCd Type 3 Shallow, Open Water 85 0.1 10-116.23-16.001-P 5 1 PEMCd I Type 3 lFresh (Wet) Meadow WETLAND F 1-30, EXISTING, 10-116-23-16-001-E WETLAND F 1-30, PREDICTED, 10-116-23-16-001-P 15 0.5 1 * Denotes Incomplete calculation data. Tuesday, July 26, 2005 Page I of !C Wetland Functional Assessment Summary Chanhassen West Business Park Downstream Wetland Hydrologic Flood Water Water Shoreline Wetland lD Hydrogeomorphology Regime Storage Quality Qr allry Protection 10-116.23.16-001-E Moderate Moderate ` Moderate Moderate NotApptlrable 10.116.23-16.001-P Moderate Moderate y Moderate Mc6rate Not Applicable Tuesday, July 26, 2005 . Page I of I k' i Wetland Functional Assessment Summary Chanhassen West Business Park �U mall a Aesthetics, Ground- Wetland Wetland Stormwater Amphibian Recreation, Water Restoration Stormwater Treatment Wetfand ID Wildlife Habitat Fishery Habitat Habitat Education Commercial Interaction Potential Sensitivity Needs 10-116.23.16-001•E Low NotAppllcable NotAppficable Low NotAppOcable Combksatlon Discherge, Recharge IN196-23.16-001-P MOD NotAppGcable LOW Low NotAppOcable Discharge Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate s ' t . s �� NEWDOC C � 4 C � Q � , ti • c l NEWDOG r. KJOURUGENWRONMENTAL SERVICES COMPANY Prmv;ftSoW14 Bd="4 Comprclun:iocNatwa[ltcsowaSofut�anr Memorandum Date: October 7, 2005 To: Lori Haak, City of Chanhassen cc: Jerry Backman, Schoell & Madson From: Melissa Barrett, Kjolhaug Environmental Services Company Re: Chanhassen West Business Park, Chanhassen, MN — Incidental Wetland Exemption and No -Loss Determination Incidental Wetland Exemption This memo is being sent to request that Incidental Wetland Exemptions be approved for three wetlands on the Chanhassen West Business Park site (the project) in Chanhassen, Minnesota. Wetland A, Wetland F 51-80, and Wetland F 91-97 meet exemption requirements of Subpart 5(C) of:N innesota WCA Rule 8420.0122. Part 1 of the Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for Water/Wetlands Projects is included in Attachment A. The site is located northwest of the junction of Galpin Boulevard (County Road 19) and Lyman Boulevard within the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, MN. Currently, the site consists of a landscaping company and associated buildings, outdoor storage areas, and constriction materials as well as an old fallow crop field, woods and wetland. Much of the original topography on the site has been altered by landscape company activities (wood chip piles, gravel roadways, etc.). Aerial photography review completed by others showed Wetland A and Wetland F 91-97 to be entirely created by landscaping operations. Only the north portion of Wetland F 51-80 was determined to be incidental. Project work on the site would require fill to be placed within Wetland A, Wetland F 51-80, and Wetland F 91-97 to allow sufficient space for project construction. Minnesota WCA rule 8420.0122, Subpart 5(C) states that - a replacement plan for wetlands is not required for activities in wetland areas created soley as a result of:... (C) actions taken by public or private entities that were taken for a purpose other than creating the wetland. Because Wetland A, Wetland F 91-97, and the north part of Wetland F 51-80 meet WCA incidental exemption requirements, the applicant is seeking approval of this request for exemption at this time. 26105 Wild Rose Lane, Shorewood, Minnesota 55331, Phone: 952-401-8757, Fax: 952-401-8798 No Loss This memo is also requesting that a no -loss determination be granted for Wetland F 31-34 of the wetland delineation report. Aerial photograph review completed by others showed this area to be non -wetland. Minnesota WCA rule 8420.0220 states that the local government unit may a no - loss determination if the work will not impact a wetland. Because aerial review showed Wetland F 31-34 to be non -wetland, this area meets no -loss determination requirements. This memo documents incidental wetlands on the Chanhassen West Business Park site and also clarifies that Wetland 31-34 is actually non -wetland. The applicant is seeking concurrence with these finding at this time. Thank you. r r NA-026620-03A (V,2.02 for MS WORD) 09/01/04 Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Forms for WaterMetland Projects USE THIS APPLICATION FOR ANY PROJECT AFFECTING A LAKE, RIVER, STREAM OR WETLAND, INCLUDING: Local Government Unit Approval Pursuant to Minnesota Wetlands Conservation Act (WCA) Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Permit to Work in Public Waters Department of the Army Permit (33 CFR 325) Note: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) will forward application forms to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (l1IPCA) for processing if state water quality certification is required from the MPCA. You do not need to send this application to the MPCA. This application packet includes: Part I: The BASIC APPLICATION and the COE APPLICATION to be filled out by all applicants (see Instructions). PART II: The REPLACEMENT PLAN SUPPLEMENT to be completed only for projects that impact wetlands and require a replacement plan for wetland mitigation. If you're not sure whether your project requires a replacement plan, call your Local Government Unit (LGU) or Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) office for guidance. Do not proceed with your project until you have received all required approvals from your LGU, the DNR and the COE. If you wish to confirm the status of your application at anytime, contact the agencies directly (see Instructions, page 2). Proceeding with work before all required authorizations are obtained may result in fines or other penalties, and may Include a requirement to restore the project site to original condition. If you have questions or need assistance with filling out these forms, contact your local SWCD office, your LGU, your Area DNR Waters office, or your COE field office (see Instructions, page 2). If you believe that your project may be subject to watershed district, local zoning, or any other local regulations besides those of your LGU, contact those office(s) directly. If you are a Federal Farm Program participant and your project affects a wetland or water body on agricultural land, your eligibility for USDA benefits may be affected. Contact a Natural Resources Conservation Service office for further information. A QUICK LOOK AT THE PROJECT APPLICATION PROCESS Electronic files: Forr s can be downloaded and fitted out using Microsoft Word. Your input will be restricted to fill-in fields where users can enter text or check boxes. 'these areas appear gray on the screen, but not on the printed document. Send copies of these completed application forms toyour LGU, your Area DNR Waters office, and your COE regulatory office. Any of the agencies may make initial contact with you to: a) inform you that it has no jurisdiction over your project: b) request additional information needed: or c) inform you of applicable fees. When your application is considered complete and appropriate fees have been received (if requested) it will be distributed for appropriate review. Following agencies' reviews, you will be informed if it has been approved, approved with changes or conditions, withdrawn, or denied. For infommation about state laws, rules and regulations that direct this process go to the web site www.revisorleg.state.mn.us. For information on US. Army Corps of Engineers regulations go to the web site www.mvp.usacc.army.mil. Instructions for Part KELP 1: Every applicant must fill out Section 1. The applicant is the person, agency, company, corporation, or other organization that owns, leases, or holds other legal rights to the land where the project is located. Indicate names of multiple applicants on a separate sheet. KELP 1A: Fill out Section IA only if you have designated an authorized agent. An authorized agent may bean attorney, builder, consultant, contractor, engineer, or any other person or organization designated by the applicant to represent him/her in this process. An agent is not required. KELP 5: Purpose, description and dimensions of project: State briefly (in a sentence or two) what you propose to do and why it is needed. Also, describe whether your project will involve any of the following: Construction of structures, filling, draining, dewatering, removing, excavating or repair, Construction of an access path, bridge, culvert, dam, ditch, dock, driveway, riprap, road, sand blanket, shore protection, or tile line. Construction of any structures on fill, piles or a float -supported platform If so, describe. Dredging or discharging (placing fill material) into a wetland or other water body (including the temporary placement of material). If so, explain the specific purpose of the placement of the material (such as erosion control) and indicate how it will be done (such as with a backhoe or dragline). if dredged material is to be discharged on an upland site, identify the location of the site. Minnesota I.ocal/Statc/Fcderal Application Fors for Water/Wetland Projects Instructions, Page 1 Include an overhead view drawing showing the work to be undertaken and its relative location on the property. Show items such as property boundaries or lot dimensions; location and extent of shoreline, wetlands and water; location and dimensions and footprint of the proposed project, structure or activity (include length; width, elevation and other measurements as appropriate); points of reference such as existing homes, structures, docks or landscape features; indication of north; and location of spoil and disposal sites (if applicable). Hand drawn, computer generated or professionally prepared drawings are acceptable, as long as they contain all necessary information clearly, accurately, and in adequate detail. Please include specific dimensions whenever possible. You may also include photos, if you wish. IiELP 7: For information regarding adjacent landowners, contact the tax assessor where the project is to be developed. HELP 8: If any part of the work has already been completed, describe the area already developed. Include a description of structures completed; any dredged or fill material already discharged (including type of material and volume in cubic yards); acres or square feet filled (if a wetland or other waterbody); and whether the work was done under an existing permit (if so identify the authorization, if possible). HELP 9: Other permits, reviews or approval related to the project may include the following: conditional use permit; plat approval; zoning variance; National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit; state disposal system permit (includes dredged material disposal); watershed district/watershed management organization permit (stormwater, erosion, floodplain); environmental assessment workshect/envi onmental impact statement; hazardous waste site; feedlot permit; groundwater appropriation permit; or county/township driveway/road permit. Are you aware of any archeological or cultural resource determinations or surveys completed concerning the project or replacement site by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) or others? If yes, please explain on a separate sheet or attach a copy of any determinations or surveys. Final Checklists (Part]) ❑ Have you completed all of Part I (Page 1), plus the Federal application (Page 2)? ❑ Did you (and your agent, if applicable) sign Section 10 on page I? ❑ Have you signed the Application for the Department of the Army Permit (Page 2) to seek Federal authorization of your project? ❑ Have you included the necessary attachments for Part 1? Attachments must include: ❑ Site Locator Map (Section 3) ❑ Type of Project (Section 4) (if additional space was needed) ❑ Overhead View of Project (Section 5 and HELP 5) ❑ Project Purpose, Description and Dimensions (Section 5) (if additional space was needed) Attachments may also include: ❑ Applicant Contact Information (HELP 1) (if additional space was needed) ❑ Project Location (Section 3) (if additional space was needed) ❑ Project Alteratives (Section 6) (if additional space was needed) ❑ Photographs ❑ Adjoining Property Owners (Section 7) (if additional space was needed) ❑ Work Already Completed Section (Section 8) (if you answered YES) ❑ State Historic Preservation Office determination or survey Submitting Your Application Make three copies of the entire application and all attachments. Keep the original, and mail a complete copy of your application to each of the local, state, and Federal entities listed below. Be sure to include Part I and all attachments with each application. LOCAL: Send to the appropriate Local Government Unit (LGU). If necessary, contact your county Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) office or visit the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) web site (www.bwsr.state.mn.us) to determine the appropriate LGU. STATE: Send to your Area DNR Waters office, attention Area Hydrologist. If necessary, contact your county Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) office or visit the DNR website (wwwAnnstate.mn.us) to locate the Area Hydrologist for your location, or contact a Regional DNR office: NW Region: NE. Region: Central Region: Southern Region: 2115 Birchmont Beach Road N.E- 1201 East Highway 2 1200 Warner Road 261 Highway 15 South Bemidji, MN 56601 Grand Rapids, MN 55744 St. Paul, MN 55106 New Ulm, MN 56073 Phone:218-755-3973 Phone: 218-327-4416 Phone: 651-772-7910 Phone: 507 359-6053 FEDERAL: Send to the appropriate U.S.. Army Corps of Engineers regulatory field office: Brainerd: St. Paul: La Crescent: Two Harbors: U.S. COE, Regulatory Branch U.S. COE, Regulatory Branch U.S. COE, Regulatory Branch U.S. COE, Regulatory Branch 10867 E. GuIl Lake Drive N.W. Army Corps of Engineers Centre 1114 South Oak Street 1554 Highway 2, Suite 2 Brainerd, MN 56401-9051 190 5`11 Street East La Crescent, MN 55947-1338 Two Harbors, MN 55161 Phone: 218-829.8402 St. Paul, MN 55101-9051 Phone. 507-895-8059 Phone: 218-834-6630 Phone: 651-290.5375 WEB SITES: BWSR www.bwsrstate.mn.us U.S. ACOE:wwwmvp.usace_army.nil DNR: www.dnrstate.mn.us MPCA-,www.pea.state.mn.us Minnesota 1.oeaVState/Federai Application Forms for WaterlWetland Projects Instructions, Page 2 a NA-02662"31i (V.2.02 for MS WORD) 09/01/04 Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for WaterMletland Proiects For Internal Use Only Field Office initial ADDlication Deemed PART is BASIC APPLICATION '.See HELP' directs you to important additional information and assistance in Instructions, Page 1. 1. LANDOWNER/APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION (See Help 1) Name: Eden Trace Corporation Phone: (612) 361-0722 Complete mailing address: 8156 Mallory Court, Chanhassen, MN 55305 I.A. AUTHORIZED AGENT (See Help 1A) (Only if applicable; an agent is not required) Name: Schoell R Madson Phone: (952) 546-7601 Complete mailing address: 10580 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 1, Minneapolis, MN 55305 2. NAME, TYPE AND SIZE OF PUBLIC WATERS or WETLANDS IMPACTED (Attach Additional Project Area sheets if needed) Name or I.D. # of Waters Impacted (if applicable; if known); (Check all that apply): ❑Lake []River ®Wetland type ❑ I ❑ 1L ❑ 2 ❑ 3 04 ❑ 5 ❑ 6 ❑ 7 ❑ 8 Indicate size of entire lake or wetland (check one): ® Less than 10 acres (indicate size: —0.6 ac) ❑ 10 to 40 acres ❑ Greater than 40 acres 3. PROJECT LOCATION (Information can be found on property tax statement, property title or title insurance), Project street address: Galpin/Lyman Blvd Fire #: City (if applicable): I/, Section: Section: Township #: Range #: County: Carver Lot #: Block: Subdivision: Watershed (name or ii) Attach a simple site locator map. If needed, include on the map written directions to the site from a known location or landmark, and provide distances from known locations. Label the sheet SITE LOCATOR MAP. A. TYPE OF PROJECT: Describe the type of proposed work. Attach TYPE OF PROJECT sheet if needed, See the wetland permit application for proposed project plan. This application specifically addresses fill within incidental wetland areas of the project site. S. PROJECT PURPOSE, DESCRIPTION AND DIMENSIONS: Describe what you plan to do and why it is needed, how you plan to construct the project with dimensions (length, width, depth), area of impact, and when you propose to construct the project. This is the most important part of your application. See HELP 5 before completing this section; see What To Include on Plans (instructions, page 1). Attach PROJECTDESCRIPT10Nsheet. Footprint of project: -- 0.60 acres or square feet drained, filled or excavated. 6. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES: What alternatives to this proposed project have you considered that would avoid or minimize impacts to wetlands or waters? List at least TWO additional alternatives to your project in Section 5 that avoid wetlands (one of which may be "no build" or "do nothing"), and explain why you chose to pursue the option described in this application over these alternatives. Attach PROJECTALTERNATIYES sheet if needed. Wetlands F 51-80, F 91-97, and Wetland A are incidental; therefore, no alternatives analysis is needed. 7. ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS: For projects that impact more than 10,000 .square feet of water or wetlands, list the complete mailing addresses of adjacent property owners on an attached separate sheet. (See HELP 7) 8. PORTION OF WORK COMPLETED: Is any portion of the work in wetland or water areas already completed? ❑ Yes ®No. If yes, describe the completed work on a separate sheet of paper labeled WORK ALREADY COMPLETED. (See HELP 8) 9. STATUS OF OTHER APPROVALS: List any other permits, reviews or approvals related to this proposed project that are either pending or have already been approved or denied on a separate attached sheet. See HELP 9. 10. I am applying for state and local authorization to conduct the work described in this application. I am familiar with the information contained in this application. To the best of my knowledge and belief, all information in Part I is true, complete, and accurate, I possess th authority to undertake the work described, or I am acting as the duly authorized agent of the applicant. 1 Signature of appy t (Landowner Date Signature ofagent (ifapplicable) Date 'This block must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity and has the necessary property rights to do so. If only the Agent has signed. please attach a separate sheet signed by the landowner, givingnecessary authorization to the Agent. Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Forms for Water/Weiland Projects Page I t APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT (33 CFR 325) OMB APPROVAL NO.0710-003 Expires Dee 31. 2003 The publie burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 10 Hours per response, although the majority of appticationt should require 5 hours or km Ibis includes the time for reviewing iratructioat, searching existing data Sauces, gathcriagand maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding thisburden esiimate or any otheraspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden; to Department of Defense. Washington Headquarters Service Directorate of Information Operations and Reports.1215 leffersat Davis Highway. Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302; and to the 01T" of Management and Budget, t'aperwork Reduction Project (0710-0003). Washington. bC 20503. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, m person shall be subject so aay pem]ty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. Please DO NOT RETURN your form to either of these addresses Corpkted appliatioas must be submitted to the District engineer havingiurisdiction over the location of the proposed activity.. PRIVACY ACT STATEJIE.\'1: Auth iitia: Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10.33 USC 403: Clean Water Act. Section 404,33 USC 1344; Marine Protection. Research and Sanctuaries Act. 33 USC 1413. Section 103, Principal purpose: Information provided on this form will be used in evmhatiug the application for a permit. Routine uses: This information maybe shared with the Department of Justice and other Pcderal, state, and local government agencies. &knnssioa of requested information is vol=W. however, if information is not Provided the gmn t application cannot be evaluated nor can a rcrn >t be issued. ITEMS .1 THROUGH 4 TO BE FILLED IN BY THE CORPS 1. APPLICATION NO. 2. FIELD OFFICE CODE 13. DATE RECEIVED 14. DATE APPLICATION COMPLETED YOU DO NOT NEED TO COMPLETE ITEMS 6-10 and 12-25 in the SHADED AREAS. All applicants must complete non -shaded items 5 and 26. If an agent is used, also complete items 8 and 11. This optional Federal form is valid for use only when included as hart of this entire state annlication racket. S. APPLICANT'S NAME I 8. AUMORi2ED AGENT'S NAME AND TITLE (an agent is not rewired) Eden Trace Corporation Schoell & Madsnn, inc. 11. STATF,,%IM"r OF AUTHORIZATION (ijapplicable, complete only ijauthorizfng an agent) I hereby authorize Schoell & Madsen, Inc. t0 act on my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to furnish, upon request, supplemental information in support of this pcm it application. APPLICANTS SIGNATURE: DATE: 26. Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certify that the information in this application is complete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein or am acting as the duly authorized agent of the applicant. Signature of agent (if any) Date The application must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant), or it may be signed by a duly authorized agent if the statement in Block 1 I has been filled out and signed. 18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up with any [tick. scheme, or disguises a material fact or makes any false. fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or entry, shall be fined not more than S10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both, ENG FORM 4345, Jul 97 EDITION OF FEB 94 IS OBSOLETE. (Proponent: CECW-OR) Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for Water/Wetland Projects Page 2 FOR LGU USE ONLY: Delermination for Part I: ❑ No WCA Jurisdiction Q' Exempt.No.3C (per MN Rule S420.0122) rlertl, j-,V' + • F F'51- $a; F 11-1'1; LrJe41"X h B'NO Loss: (A,B,...G, per MN Rule 8420.0220) F 31-3q ❑ Replacement required -- applicant must eornplew Part 11 SIP FTF TI IF, SFCTIQN Pf LOW 'VI Y IF RFPI A EMI "I I T R IRFb: Application Is (check one): 0 Approved ❑Approved with conditions (conditions attached) ❑ Denied j - r ComrntntsoTindin �ot\ rr?y_iew—Q 6AY o l S Si�,— ; ,% 6 a�+1y4-.s4y rb�f. w£�lart�s {or Poe-F-o,ns A-1ev-e-0,} 0.1.CJ2 a+r c-i t.r- inc�d `� ar/� jv,�-wt°-f-la-�tol o-s IA�iCola• v V� LG ocia! signature ate orl % ,1 lrws C00/9;ACL4/1 Name and Tetle For Agricultural and Drainage exemptions (WIN Rule 8420.0122 Subps. I and 2B), LGU has received proof of recording of restrictions (per ANIN Rule 8420.01IS)- County where recorded Date Document # assigned by recorder LGU oljicial signature Date Minnesota LocaVState/Fedml Application Form for Water/Wetland Projects Page 3 r y. ■� NEWDOC Z mgg-� ®■r O � • , r s a • e .: NEWDOC a. Y If Schoell & Madson, Inc. Pianning • Engineering • Surveying i September 22, 2005 Paul Moline Carver County Water Management 600 East O' Street Chaska, MN 55318 Re: SWCD Coinments Chanhassen West Business Park Dear Paul, ` This letter is in response to the memo dated 9/19/05 from Carver County Water Management in y regards to the Chanhassen West Business Park project in Chaska. Changes have been made to the plans based on comments in the memo, and our response is as follows: Stormwater Issues 1. The calculations for existing conditions should be resubmitted and show the effects of ponding in the northeast wetland. The submitted calculations use sheet flow runoff from 35.74 acres to the southwest wetland, which is not representative of the Existing Drainage figure. The increase in runoff may have impacts on downstream and water qualify treatment on site. ➢ The drainage figures and HydroCAD model have been revised to more accurately model where runoff from the site ends up. Please refer to the attached, updated storm report. 2. Water Quality calculations need to be submitted for review. ➢ The pond has been designed to NURP standards for water quality, the calculations of which can be found in the revised drainage calculations under the NURP rainfall event. In summary, 3.817 of (166,269 cf) of runoff enters the pond during the 2.5" rainfall, and the pond has 176,459 cf of dead pool storage available. Calculations on the sizing of raingardens to accommodate runoff from the median rainfall event in the Twin Cities area have also been submitted. Please refer to the attached exhibit. 3 Proposed CNs for greenspace should be raised to C type soils to account for the affect of compaction. R ➢ The drainage calculations have been revised to reflect this change. 4. Downstream capacity of the southwest wetland (Oullot A) should be submitted. ➢ The survey provided to us does not contain enough information to determine the capacity of this wetland. In addition to a lack of topographical information from the interior of the wetland, the western boundary of the wetland is not located on the property. 10580 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 1 * Minneapolis, MN 55305-1525 Office (952) 546-7601 • Fax (952) 546-9065 www.sdzoellmadson.com h 5. The outlet of the northwest wetland (Outlot B) should be submitted. ➢ Information on the inlet from the northwest wetland to the storm sewer pipe along the western boundary has been added to the plans. 6 Rainwater Gardens/lnf7ftration- - Additional details are needed including: ➢ Documentation should be submitted for the volume provided for infiltration. Several basins are noted on the plans, but no calculations are provided • Calculations on the sizing of raingardens to accommodate runoff from the median rainfall event in the Twin Cities are included in an attached exhibit and spreadsheet. In general, the raingardens are sized using the assumption that roof drains will not be used, and that roof runoff will flow across the parking lot. Raingardens are proposed in as many locations as possible, but site conditions and landscape requirements restricted the size and number of raingardens, and as such, they are only proposed where practical. In some cases, the raingardens do not provide enough storage for runoff from the median rainfall event, but it was our opinion that some treatment is better than none at all. ➢ Soils used (sand rill or rock fill, 50% clean sand, 25% loamy topsoil, 25% compost) • A note has been added to the Landscape plan which specifies that this type of soil should be used for rain garden construction. ➢ Cross -sections A typical rain garden cross-section has been provided on the details sheet. ➢ Erosion control blanket and type ➢ Timing of installation (after contributing area is stabilized). ➢ To reduce initial degradation of basins, It is recommended plugs, shrubs and grasses are used in addition to the `rainwater garden seed mix'. • A note has been added to the Landscape plan which details these items. Erosion Control: 1. Stable EOF's are needed for the proposed pond on site. The EOF should be clearly labeled on the plan and a detail is needed. The EOF can be stabilized with a turf re - enforcement mat or fabric and riprap. ➢ A EOF has been added to the plans, and a detail has been added to the grading plan. It shall be stabilized with a turf reinforcement mat. 2. Erosion control blanket should be speciried in the swale from the FES to the wetland along the west boundary of the site. The blanket specirred should adequately protect the area from designed velocity and depth of flow. The blanket and seed in the swate should be installed within 24 hours of culvert installation. AM blankets on the plan should be shown as a shaded area. ➢ The swale on the west side of the property has been removed and replaced with storm sewer, so an erosion control blanket will no longer be necessary in that area. 3 Erosion control blanket is recommended for the pond slopes from around 952 to 942 contours. All blanket on the plan should be shown as a shaded area. ➢ An erosion control blanket has been added to pond slopes and designated by a hatch pattem at all locations on the site. 4. Erosion note number 5 should include 2 tons of mulch per acre with seed for stabilization; seed alone is not considered stabilization. ➢ Note ##10 on the SWPPP has been changed to reflect the addition of 2 tons of mulch per acre in addition to seeding for final stabilization. _ 5 All curb cuts need riprap and fabric or sod installed within 24 hours of curb installation. ➢ All curb cuts will have 10 CY of Class IV riprap added, and a note has been added to the grading plan and SWPPP. Erosion Control: 1. Temporary sediment basins are needed prior to disturbing upslope areas. The areas of temporary sediment basins should be labeled on the plan. A temporary outlet is needed for the pond, details should be provided. A temporary outlet could consist of a perforated riser and rock cone. Temporary basins are needed in the area of the proposed permanent stormwater pond, the SE comer of the site prior to discharging to the culvert under Galpin. ➢ Temporary sedimentation basins have been added to the plan in the locations requested, and are clearly labeled. The primary basin (the stormwater pond) will have a temporary outlet, and a detail has been provided on the details sheet. 2. The 14 imco inlet control detail proposed will work for all curbside inlets. Any and all area inlets or drop inlets in paved areas will need alternate controls / Wimco details. The engineer should check on alternate designs for imco-type inlet controls to ht the various type of inlets. ➢ A Wimco insert detail for circular manholes and catch basins has been added to the details sheet. 3. Additional inlet controls may be needed for adjacent inlets on Galpin and Street A. ➢ A note has been added to the grading plan instructing the contractor to install Wimco-type catch basin inserts on all proposed catch basins on Galpin Court (formerly Street A) and on Galpin Blvd. 4. Silt fence will be needed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond the wetland 5. Silt fence needed for Lot 5, .Outlot B. 6 Silt fence needed north of berm In Lot 6 as there is a FES taking water north off site. 7. Silt fence needed south of tot 1. ➢ Silt fence has been added in these locations 8 Each building site will need perimeter controls once the streets are paved and rock exits will be needed as each lot is built -out. ➢ A note has been added to the grading plan detailing this requirement, and since each building will be developed and approved separately, it is likely that this requirement will be met at the time the buildings are built -out. 9. Type 1 and Type 2 silt fence locations need to be specirred on the plan. Type 2 should be installed around all wetland areas and in the SE comer of the site to protect the culvert under Galpin. The SF should be extended along the South side to close the gap in the SF. ➢ The two types of silt fence have been added to the plans in the areas requested. 0 SWPPP Review: Does the SWPPP Narrative: Identify the entity responsible for long term O&M? o The Owners Association has been specified on the SWPPP Do plan sheets identify. Locations and types of sediment basins? . o Sediment basin locations have been specified on the plans Are Temporary Sedimentation basins. o Adequately sized? ■ The major sedimentation basin on the site, the stormwater pond, is adequately sized to handle runoff from the entire site. The other sedimentation basins are small and will only treat a limited amount of water, but are oversized for the amount of area that wil Ibe draining to them. o Designed to prevent short-circuiting? ■ The sedimentation basin locations should prevent short-circuiting o Are outlets designed to remove floating debris? o Are outlets designed to allow complete drawdown? ■ The temporary outlet is detailed on the details sheet, and will be able to remove floating debris and allow complete drawdown if installed. o Do outlets have energy dissipation? o Have a stabilized emergency spillway? ■ The SWPPP instructs the contractor to provide energy dissipation and a stabilized emergency spillway. Does the wet sedimentation basin have a stabilized emergency overflow? o The pond has a emergency overflow stabilized with a turn reinforcement mat, and is detailed on the grading plan. - Are wetted perimeters of ditches stabilized within 200 feet of surface water? o A note has been added to the SWPPP. There are no swales on the site as of the most current plan revision Are sediment control practices established on down gradient perimeters? o Silt fence has been added to close any gaps on down gradients Do stockpiles have sediment control and placed in areas away from surface waters? o A note has been added to the SWPPP instructing sediment control around any stockpiles the contractor may use. If you have any questions or wish to discuss any of these responses, please feel free to contact me at 952-847-9608. Sincerely, Jared Jones, E.I.T. Schoell & Madson, Inc. CC: Pat Minger. Minger Construction Aaron Miynek, Carver SWCD Bob Generous, City of Chanhassen Lori Haak, City of Chanhassen i l • 2 - s i NEWDOC 3 ,T Y 1 i f 5"=r Carver County Planning & Zoning Department APPLICATION FOR , WATER MANAGEMENT RULES CONFORMANCE AND APPROVAL Carver � File #: county (Office Use Only) Prior to submitt& a lication: Please contact the Planning & Zoning Office at (952) 361-1820 to determine if a Development Review Team (DRT) meeting would be benericial to discuss yourproject. Review time of final application will be reduced significantly if a DRT meeting Is hold. The DRT meets on an as needed basis and consists of staff from the Planning & Zoning Department, Carver Soil & Water Conservation District Ofce (SWCD), a reprosentative from the applicable City Office and other agencies, as needed. The DRT meetings are intended to provide the applicant with procedural information, and address potential water management concerns regarding the project at its initial stages. SECTION I - PROJECT INFORMATION Project Name/Description: C*ArP*PrSS9-M WOr 30�1� CRY/Township:_ PID#: Location- u (Sectionlrwp/Range & nearest road(s) and/or intersection(s)) Project/Site Area (Acres) ! l/ Total disturbed area (Acres):. dc " Legal Responsible Name MaMn Party (property Owner or Authorized Representative) IW ces Ptwne Fax �- qSz Sf -95'3 Principal Project Na>918 MaWngAd&M Contact E Im Ul%( t �t,Vp IVY} Phone�/ t]17a-S%-%9 Fax r cel F b G Stormwater Name M"QAdress Engineer Contact (if different from principal Project Contact) Phone Fax Col EMM Erosion Control Nam M&naAdftsl; Contact (if different from Principal Project Contact) Phone Fax cen Eman , FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: Watershed: Crow River 0 Carver 0 Bevens 0 East Chaska 0 West Chaska El Pioneer 0 Local Governmental Unit (LGU): Project Review Level: 02 0 3 (Reason) Entered in PIS-„r NPDES I _ Review Complete: P&Z SWCD Engineer FEE: 0 S1000evel 2) ❑$400 plus $750 to reimburse for engineering costs included with application; applicant shall reimburse the County for engineering casts above the initial $750 (level 3) ❑$150 Combined Level 2 & Admin. Zoning Permit Receipt # COMPLETE APPLICATION: DATE ` INITIAL DATE APPROVED: APPROVED BY; Print Sign Page 1 a YS 9 SECTION 2 - SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS .Level 2 Project: 1 to S acres not in sensitive area OR single family home and/or less than 1 acre in sensitive area. Level 3 Project. ! to S acres in sensitive area OR S acres or more ❑ For level 2 projects: Carver County requires site information (Section 2a) and an erosion control plan (2b). One copy of this information must be submitted to the County and one copy to the Carver Soil and Water Conservation District. (SWCD, 219 East Frontage Road, Waconia, MN 55387) For level 3 projects: Carver County requires site information (Section 2a), an erosion control plan (2b), and a stormwater management plan (Section 2c). kvo copies must be submitted to the County and one copy to the Carver Soil and Water Conservation District. (SWCD, SECTION 2a 219 East Frontage Road, Waconia, MN 55387) SubMIled ® Site Plan - The site location with property lines in relation to surrounding roads, slopes greater than 11) 6%, other geographic features, buildings and other structures. Contours sufficient to show localized drainage on and adjacent to the site. 2) Water Features - Identification and location of all on -site water features — includes waters of the state, water -related facilities and infrastructure (both surface and subsurface) including, but not limited to, any lake, ditch, stream or wetland; any natural or artificial water diversion or detention area; any surface or subsurface drainage system or stormwater conveyance; and any storm sewer catch basin within 300 feet of the area to be disturbed. {� 3) Vegetation - In areas where there has been a natural resource or similar inventory, the location of trees and vegetation on site, with identification of those trees and vegetation intended to be retained and/or removed. 4) Wetland Protection - The plan(s) shall have both existing and final proposed conditions drawn to scale and shall contain the following: • Evidence of permits and process required under the Wetland Conservation Act (MICA). • Delineated boundaries of existing and proposed wetlands. 5) Floodplain and Shoreland - Documentation that the application meets the requirements of the LGU's Floodplain and Shoreland Ordinances or how the activity will conform to the requirements in County Rules if the LGU does not have Shoreland or Floodplain ordinances. SECTION 2b Erosion and Sediment Control Plan - shall have both existing and final proposed conditions drawn to scale, shall be consistent with the manual Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas (Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 2000) as revised, and shall include the following: Submkted t� z) Proposed area of grading or other land -disturbing activities and delineation of the limits of disturbance including, but not limited to, areas of grubbing, clearing, ,tree removal, grading, excavation, and filling. 2) Quantity (in cubic yards) of the soil or earth material to be removed, placed, stored or otherwise moved on site. 3} Locations and descriptions of proposed runoff control, erosion prevention, sediment control and temporary and permanent soil stabilization measures. 4) A sequence(schedule) of land alteration activities and corresponding implementation of erosion control practices, monitoring, maintenance and removal of erosion and sediment control measures; and permanent site stabilization measures. (Prior to any site actMty. the responsible party shag rovide the SWCD with a construction schedule . Page 2 ❑ IF LEVEL 3 PROJECT - INFORMATION IN SECTION 2c & 3 IS REQUIRED SECTION 2c Stormwater Management Plan - The plan(s) shall have both existing and final proposed conditions drawn to scale -and shall contain the following: SuDn,�ted 1) Epsting sub -watersheds boundaries, drainage patterns and flow directions shown on a separate figure. (note: separate figure than proposed conditions.) 9 2) Location and total area (acres) of impervious area including roads, trails, panting areas, and all building areas (roofs, driveways, etc.) 3) Hydrologic calculations for volume of runoff, velocities, and peak Sow rates for the 2 year- 24 hour rainfall event, I0•yr-24-hour storm event, 100-yr-24-hour storm event, and I00-yr-10 day snowmelt event. Plans, specifications and computations shall be signed by a licensed professional engineer. 4) Infiltration requirements shall be calculated according to the Rules if A or B soil types exist on site, ;9 5) Normal water level, high water level, and emergency overflow elevations for the site. Downstream receiving waters shall be identified and have verification of adequate capacity. t6) 7) Location of Stormwater treatment facilities. SECTION 3 - FINANCIAL_ SECURITY FOR LEVEL 3 PROJECTS For Level 3 developments, the responsible party must provide financial security with the County OR must provide evidence that the LGU has obtained a financial security FOR EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL ONLY. (ChMk me) ❑ Financial Security submitted to LGU (documentation attached). ❑ Financial Security submitted to County. Amount ($1.000 per gross acre ($6,000 for work done in sensitive areas) or $1,000 for each single or twin family home, whichever is greater. The malamum security required of an individual responsible party building on several skQle or twin family home lots Is $10.000). Financial Security Issuer Financial Security Form: ❑ Letter of Credit ❑ Cash FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: Financial Security Returned: Notes: Amount Date By: wtW If an activity is subject to another agency's permitting process that requires similar information, information developed for the other process may be used in these applications'to the extent it fulfills the requirements. Additional information as relevant and necessary to evaluate an application may be required. The County, upon the advice or request of its engineer or the SWCD may require additional written reports or data such as, but not limited to a geologic report or a soils report. Page 3 k SECTION 4 — AUTHORIZATION & SIGNATURES hereby authorize the County of Carver and the County's authorized representative to enter upon the property subject to this application for the purpose of evaluating the application and upon approval of this application to determine compliance with the application and any associated agreements and with the Water Management Rules. Initials of Legally Responsible Party: a I hereby acknowledge that if the Water Management Rules requires fees and financial securities that payment of said fees and provision of required financial guarantees must be made before any work is begun pursuant to approval. Initials of Legally Responsible Party: n' r J As the person legally responsible for this project I hereby certify that I understand that this project must be conducted in accordance with the approved plans and any attached or subsequent agreements and the Water Management Rules. I further certify that all of information supplied with this application is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I further certify that I am aware that failure to abide by the provisions of application approval and/or the Water Management Rules is cause for action by the County including action against financial guarantees. Signature of Legally Responsible Party: Date: Submit to: Carver County Planning and Zoning Attn: Water Management 600 F. 4th St. Chaska, AN 55318 Fax (952) 3 61.182 8 Phone: (952) 361.1825 Page 4 Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineering • Surveying • Planning August 25, 2005 Paul Moline Carver County Planning & Zoning 600 East 4t' Street Chaska, MN 55318 Re: Stormwater Management Plan Chanhassen West Business Paris Dear Paul, On behalf of Eden Trace Corp, Schoell & Madson, Inc, is submitting this stormwater management plan for the Chanhassen West Business Park project located at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Galpin Boulevard (C.S.A.H. 19) and Lyman Boulevard (C.S.A.H. 18) in Chanhassen. 'Existing Conditions The site is currently composed of many large trees, wetlands, open areas, and a few small buildings, The majority of the stormwater falling on the site flows overland to one of the wetlands, where it collects and infiltrates. There is no stormwater management system in place currently. Proposed Conditions The proposed site plan calls for eight large office/industrial buildings, associated parking areas, and a new public street. This development will require some of the existing wetlands to be moved and new wetland areas created, but the majority of the existing wetland area will be preserved. Stormwater runoff will be collected though storm sewer and piped to a large proposed detention pond, which will then discharge water to one of the existing wetlands. 10580 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 1 • Minneapolis, MN 55305-1525 Office (952) 546-7601 • Fax (952) 546-9065 www.schoellmadson.com :". r S Water Quality Water quality will be addressed in multiple ways on the site. Raingardens have been utilized to allow for infiltration of the 0.34" rainfall event (the median event for the Twin Cities area) wherever site conditions allowed. The pond was designed using NURP design standards, so the dead pool storage of the pond is greater than the volume of runoff from a 2.5" rainfall event, The outlet control structure will also provide skimming before water is discharged into the neighboring wetland. Rate Control A runoff rate comparison for existing and proposed site conditions was conducted to estimate the drainage impact of the project. Drainage exhibits and calculations for 2, 10, and 100-year storm events are included in the report, and the results of the runoff comparison show that the proposed maximum rate of runoff is less than existing rates for all rainfall events. This conservative model does not factor in the infiltration the raingardens will provide. Please refer to the enclosed calculations performed using HydroCAD software and the civil plans for further detail. _ Maximum Rate of Runoff, Qmax cfs Existing Conditions Proposed Conditions To Pond To Wetlandl Offsite Total 2-Year Storm 12.59 10.07 1.74 11.81 10-Year Storm 38.42 29.21 6.94 36.15 100-Year Storm 83.38 61.08 16.52 77.60 Emergency Overflow Should the submerged inlet of the outlet control structure in the pond become plugged, water will first overflow the top of the structure and run into the outflow pipe. If the entire outlet control structure becomes incapable of discharging, water will overflow the west side of the pond and run down the side slope into the wetland. If you have any questions or comments regarding this report, please feel free to give me a call at 952-847-9608. Sincerely, Jared Jones, E.I.T. Schoell & Madson, Inc. J :lf]'l*Lj:IN III :JAI I kl FA 11I 0 Existing Area Proposed To Pond 0 Proposed To Wetlands/Offsite Pond 62641-047 Pond Revised 8-18-05 Type!/ 24-hr 2-Year Rainfal1=2.80" Prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Page 2 H droCAD07.00 SM 001876 O 1986-2003 A fled Microcom uter Systems 8/26/2005 Subcatchment 1S: Proposed To Pond Runoff = 49.87 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume= 3.455 af, Depth= 1.37" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 6.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Area ac) CN Description 19.720 98 Paved parking & roofs 6.220 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B (Sewer) 1.160 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B (Pond) 0.710 100 Pond 2.430 65 Woodslarass comb.. Fair. HSG B 30.240 86 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description 20.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1S: Proposed To Pond 5 6 7 8 9 16 11 12 13 14 15 i6 17 18 19 Time (hours) 62641-047 Pond Revised 8-18-05 Type1124-hr2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Page 3 H droCAD® 7.00 s/n 001876 ©1986-2003 Applied MI=com uter systems 8/26/2005 Subcatchment 3S: Existing Area Runoff — 12.59 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 1.255 af, Depth= OAT Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Area (ac) CN Description 32.430 65 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG B 2.600 85 Gravel roads, HSG B 0.710 98 Paved parkins & roofs 35.740 67 Weighted Average Te Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description 25.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 3S: Existing Area Hydrograph s Type- tt'24r-hr�2=Year . 10 13 U 1s 16 Time (hours) 19 — RutxN1 62641-047 Pond Revised 8-18-05 Prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. HydroCAD® 7,00 sly 001876 ©1986-20{ Type 1124-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Page 4 Ms 8/26/2005 Subcatchment 4S: Proposed To WetlandslOffsite Runoff - 1.74 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= OA25 af, Depth= 0.27" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Area ac CN Description 4.130 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 1.370 65 Woodsl rass comb. Fair HSG B 5.500 62 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ftlft) (ftlsec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 4S: Proposed To Wetlands/Offsite Hydrograph 6 7 a 9 fO fl 12 13 t4 is t6 17 is 19 2n Time (hours) Rurioi( 62641-047 Pond Revised 8-18-05 Type H 24-hr 2-Year Ra in fa 11=2.8 0 " Prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Page 5 H droCADO7.00 s/n 001876 ©1986-2003 Ap2lied Microcomputer Systems- 8/26/2005 Pond 2P: Pond Inflow Area = 30.240 ac, Inflow Depth = 1.37" for 2-Year event Inflow = 49.87 cfs @ '12.13 hrs, Volume= 3.455 of Outflow = 10.07 cfs @ 12.62 hrs, Volume= 3.053 af, Atten= 80%, Lag= 29.5 min Primary w 10.07 cfs @ 12.62 his, Volume= 3.053 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 942.00' Surf.Area= 31,049 sf Storage=130,899 cf Peak Elev= 944.15' @ 12.62 hrs Surf.Area= 35,426 sf Storage= 202,700 cf (71,801 cf above start) Flood Elev= 950.00, Surf.Area= 43,885 sf Storage= 354,795 cf (223,896 cf above start) Plug -Flow detention time= 609.0 min calculated for 0.048 of (1% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 80.6 min ( 875.7 - 795.1 ) # Invert Avail.Stora a Storage Descri tion 1 936.00' 354,795 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store feet s -ft cubic -feet cubic -feet 936.00 16,637 0 0 937.00 18,146 17,392 17,392 938.00 19,718 18,932 36,324 939.00 21,351 20,535 56,858 940.00 23,045 22,198 79,056 941.00 24,796 23,921 102,977 942.00 31,049 27,923 130,899 944.00 35,101 66,150 197,049 946.00 39,380 74,481 271,530 948.00 43,885 83,265 354,795 # Routinp Invert Outlet Devices 1 Primary 942.00' 36.0" x 30.0' long Culvert RCP, sq.cut end projecting, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert= 941.50' S= 0.0167P n= 0.012 Cc= 0.900 2 Device 1 942.00' 18.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 3 Device 1 945.50' 60.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C= 0.600 , 4 Device 1 944.50' 5.0' long x 0.5' breadth Broad -Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 Coef. (English) 2.80 2.92 3.08 3.30 3.32 Primary OutFlow Max=10.07 cfs @ 12.62 hrs HW=944.15' (Free Discharge) t -1=Culvert (Passes 10.07 cfs of 24.47 cfs potential flow) 40rifice/Grate Orifce/Grate (Orifice Controls 10.07 cfs @ 5.7 fps) ( Controls 0.00 cfs) -Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 62641-047 Pond Revised 8-18-05 Type 11 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Page 6 H droCADO 7.00 s/n 001876 ©1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 8/26/2005 Pond 2P: Pond Hydrograph Timo (hogs) 62641-047 Pond Revised 8-18-05 Type /I 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.10" Prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Page 7 H droCADO 7.00 s/n 001876 OO 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 8/26/2005 Subcatchment 1S: Proposed To Pond Runoff = 87.87 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 6.161 af, Depth= 2.44" Runoff_ by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type 1124-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.10" Area ac) CN Description 19.720 98 Paved parking & roofs 6.220 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B (Sewer) 1.160 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B (Pond) 0.710 100 Pond 2.430 65 Woods/grass comb.. Fair. HSG B 30.240 86 Weighted Average To Length 20.0 ;locity Capacity Description Vsec) [cfs) Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1S: Proposed To Pond Hydrograph 4 ype.1124-fir ' O Year -.. ... Rainfall:4.0" Runoff•Area=X240,ac = _ - y -.. Runoff-Volume=6_1_61 af. _ Runoff Depth#2.44"e -,Tc_-20 0-mien... =- CN=86 ' a d i t n ___ _ . '...:•a S ¢! a-- -:.p. A h b c § p. 7 8 9 SO ii 12 13 14 45 16 iT i& i9 20 Time (hours) 62641-047 Pond Revised 8-18-05 Type 1124-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.10" Prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Page 8 H droCAD® 7.00 s1n 001876 ©1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 8/26/2005 Subcatchment 3S: Existing Area Runoff = 38.42 cfs @ 12.21 hrs, Volume= 3.197 A Depth= 1.07" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type 1124-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.10" Area (ac) CN Description 32.430 65 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG B 2.600 85 Gravel roads, HSG B 0.710 98 Paved parking & roofs 35.740 67 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description: 25.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 3S: Existing Area Hydrograph — Runoff Time (hours) - - - -- 62641-047 Pond Revised 8-18-05 Type II 24-hr 10--Year Rainfall=4.10" Prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Page 9 H droCAD® 7.00 s/n 001876 01986-2003 ApRIled Microcomputer Systems 8/26/2005 Subcatchment 4S: Proposed To Wetlands/Offsite Runoff = 6.94 cfs @ 12.03 hrs, Volume= 0.371 af, Depth= 0.81" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span = 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.10" Area ac) CN Description 4.130 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 1.370 65 Woods/grass comb.. Fair. HSG B 5.500 62 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description 10.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 4S: Proposed To Wetlands/Offsite Hydrograph '6.§Fds s Tvne II 24-hr 10 Year 1 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 i5 16 17 18 19 20 Tlme (hours) — Rurmi( 62641-047 Pond Revised 8-18-05 Type // 24-hr 90-Year Rainfall=4.10" Prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Page 10 H droCADO 7.00 s/n 001876 ©1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer S stems 8/26/2005 Pond 2P: Pond Inflow Area = 30.240 ac, Inflow Depth = 2.44" for 10-Year event Inflow - 87.87 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 6.161 of Outflow = 29.21 cfs @ 12.44 hrs, Volume= 5.651 af, Atten= 67%, Lag=19.0 min Primary = 29.21 cfs @ 12.44 hrs, Volume= 5.651 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 942.00' Surf.Area= 31,049 sf Storage=130,899 cf Peak Elev= 945.44` @ 12.44 hrs Surf.Area= 38,192 sf Storage= 250,854 cf (119,955 cf above start) Flood Elev--950.00' Surf.Area= 43,885 sf Storage= 354,795 cf (223,896 cf above start) Plug -Flow detention time= 267.5 min calculated for 2.646 of (43% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 76.6 min ( 859.0 - 782.4 ) # Invert Avall.Stora a Storage Description 1 936.00' 354,795 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store feet s -€t cubic -feet cubic -feet 936.00 16,637 0 0 937.00 18,146 17,392 17,392 938.00 19,718 18,932 36,324 939.00 21,351 20,635 56,858 940.00 23,045 22,198 79,056 941.00 24,796 23,921 102,977 942.00 31,049 27,923 130,899 944.00 35,101 66,150 197,049 946.00 39,380 74,481 271,530 948.00 43,885 83,265 354,795 # Routing Invert Outlet Devices 1 Primary 942.00' 36.0" x 30.0' long Culvert RCP, sq.cut end projecting, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert= 941.50' S= 0.0167P n= 0.012 Cc= 0.900 2 Device 1 942.00' 18.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 3 Device 1 945.50' 60.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C= 0.600 4 Device 1 944.50' 5.0' long x 0.5' breadth Broad -Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 = Coef. (English) 2.80 2.92 3.08 3.30 3.32 Primary OutFlow Max=29.14 cfs @ 12.44 hrs HW=945.44' (Free Discharge) t-1=Culvert (Passes 29.14 cfs of 47.25 cfs potential flow) 2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 13.96 cfs @ 7.9 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 4=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 15.17 cfs @ 3.2 fps) 4 ti 62641-047 Pond Revised 8-18-05 Type 1124-hr 10-Year Ralnfal1=4.10" Prepared by Schoeil & Madson, Inc. Page 11 H droCAD® 7.00 sln 001876 ©1986-2003 Applied Microcom uter Sy2tems 8/26/2005 Pond 2P: Pond Hydrograph 10 11 12 13 Time (hours) 62641-047 Pond Revised 8-18-05 Type 1124-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Page 12 H droCAM 7.00 sln 001876 01986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 8/26/2005 Subcatchment IS: Proposed To Pond Runoff — 141.59 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 10.142 af, Depth= 4.02" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Area (ac) CN Description 19.720 98 Paved parking & roofs 6.220 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B (Sewer) 1.160 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B (Pond) 0.710 100 Pond 2.430 65 Woods/grass comb.. Fair. HSG B 30.240 86 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description 20.0 3 0 w cfs Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1S: Proposed To Pond Hydrograpn a Type,11.24-h r„1.00,-Year: •= Rair fa11 5:90" Ru noff Area=30240 }ad Runoff Volume` 70,142 af_ k Runoff9Depth_ 4.02"-= ffnMn S 6 7 8 9 M fl I2 13 14 15 96 17 18 Time (hours) '~ ' 62641-047 Pond Revised 8-18-05 Prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. HydroCADO 7.00 sln 001876 ©1986-201 Type 11 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Page 13 = Subcatchment 3S: Existing Area Runoff = 83.38 cfs @ 12.20 hrs, Volume= 6.622 af, Depth= 2.22" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Area ac CN Description 32.430 65 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG B� 2.600 85 Gravel roads, HSG B 0.710 98 Paved parkin2 & roofs 35.740 67 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description 25.0 Direct Entry, u 3 0 L6 Subcatchment 3S: Existing Area Hydrograph Time (hours) - - — Runotf 62641-047 Pond Revised 8-18-05 Type Il 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Page 14 W droCAD® 7.00 sln 001876 01986-2003 Ap2lied Microcomputer Systems 8/26/2005 Subcatchment 4S: Proposed To Wetlands/Offsite Runoff = 16.52 cfs @ 12.02 hrs, Volume= 0.837 af, Depth= 1.83" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Area ac CN Description 4.130 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 1.370 65 Woodsl rass comb. Fair HSG B 5.500 62 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description tin (feet) (ftlft) (ftlsec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 4S: Proposed To Wetlands/Offsite Hydrograph Type II 24-hr 1OO.Year =_8 _-�=Rairifall=5:90" RunoffeArea 5.500 ac ='I y " `�RunoffhVol'uyme=0:837raf` . -Runoff.Depth=.I-:8-3--" _„ Y . Tc=, oyo min. h e : 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 T1me (hours) 62641-047 Pond Revised 8-18-05 Type 1124-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Page 15 H droCAD®7.00 sfn 001876 _©1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems „- 8/26/2005 Pond 2P: Pond Inflow Area w 30.240 ac, Inflow Depth = 4.02" for 100-Year event Inflow = 141.59 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 10.142 of Outflow - 61.08 cfs @ 12.37 hrs, Volume= 9.509 af, Atten= 57%, Lag= 14.8 min Primary - 61.08 cfs @ 12.37 hrs, Volume= 9.509 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 942.00' Surf.Area= 31,049 sf Storage=130,899 cf Peak Elev= 946.72' @ 12.37 hrs Surf.Area= 41,004 sf Storage= 301,538 cf (170,639 cf above start) Flood Elev= 950.00' Surf.Area= 43,885 sf Storage= 354,795 cf (223,896 cf above start) Plug -Flow detention time=183.0 min calculated for 6.483 of (64% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 62.4 min ( 833.3 - 770.9 # Invert Avail.Stora a Storage Description 1 936.00' 354,795 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store feet s -ft cubic feet cubic -feet 936.00 16,637 0 0 937.00 18,146 17,392 17,392 938.00 19,718 18,932 36,324 939.00 21,351 20,535 56,858 940.00 23,045 - 22,198 79,056 941.00 24,796 23,921 102,977 942.00 31,049 27,923 130,899 944.00 35,101 66,150 197,049 946.00 39,380 74,481 271,530 948.00 43,885 83,265 354,795 # Routing Invert Outlet Devices 1 Primary 942.00' 36.0" x 30.0' long Culvert RCP, sq.cut end projecting, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert= 941.50' S= 0.0167 'f n= 0.012 Cc= 0.900 2 Device 1 942.00' 18.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 3 Device 1 945.50' 60.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C= 0.600 . 4 Device 1 944.50' 5.0' long x 0.5' breadth Broad -Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 Coef. (English) 2.80 2.92 3.08 3.30 3.32 Primary OutFlow Max=61.01 cfs @ 12.37 hrs HW=946.71' (Free Discharge) t'1=Culvert (Inlet Controls 61.01 cfs @ 8.6 fps) 2=Orifice/Grate (Passes < 16.94 cfs potential flow) 3=OrificelGrate (Passes < 68.69 cfs potential flow) =Broad -Crested Rectangular Weir (Passes < 54.68 cfs potential flow) 62641-047 Pond Revised 8-18-05 Prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. HydroCAD® 7.00 sin 001876 0)1986-2003 Armlied Microcorn Pond 2P: Pond Hydrograph Time (hours) Type 1124-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Page 16 In m- -- primary 1 P R 62641-047 Pond Revised 8-18-05 Type 1124-hrNURP Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Page 1 H droCADO 7.00 s/n 001876 01986-2003 AR21ied Microcomputer Systems 8/26/2005 Pond 2P: Pond Inflow Area = 30.240 ac, Inflow Depth = 1.14" for NURP event Inflow - 41.46 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume= 2.869 of Outflow - 8.62 cfs @ 12.62 hrs, Volume= 2.496 af, Men= 79%, Lag= 29.2 min Primary = 8.62 cfs @ 12.62 hrs, Volume= 2.496 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt- 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 942.00' Surf.Area= 31,049 sf Storage=130,899 cf Peak Elev= 943.78' @ 12.62 hrs Surf.Area= 34,649 sf Storage=189,666 cf (58,767 cf above start) Flood Elev= 950.00' Surf.Area= 43,885 sf Storage= 354,795 cf (223,896 cf above start) Plug -Flow detention time= (not calculated) Center -of -Mass det. time= (not calculated) # Invert Avail.Stora a Storage Description 1 936.00' 354,795 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store feet s -ft cubic -feet cubic -feet 936.00 16,637 0 0 937.00 18,146 17,392 17,392 938.00 19,718 18,932 36,324 939.00 21,351 20,535 56,858 940.00 23,045 22,198 79,056 941.00 24,796 23,921 102,977 942.00 31,049 27,923 130,899 944.00 35,101 66,150 197,049 946.00 39,380 74,481 271,530 948.00 43,885 83,265 354,795 # Routing Invert Outlet Devices 1 Primary 942.00' 36.0" x 30.0' long Culvert RCP, sq.cut end projecting, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert= 941.50' S= 0.0167 7 n= 0.012 Cc= 0.900 2 Device 1 942.00' 18.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 3 Device 1 945.50' 60.0" Horiz. OrificelGrate Limited to weir flow C= 0.600 4 Device 1 944.50' 5.0' long x 0.5' breadth Broad -Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 Coef. (English) 2.80 2.92 3.08 3.30 3.32 Primary OutFlow Max=8.62 cfs @ 12.62 hrs HW=943.78' (Free Discharge) E2=0rilficelGrate ulvert (Passes 8.62 cfs of 18.10 cfs potential flow) (Orifice Controls 8.62 cfs @ 4.9 fps) =OrifcelGrate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) =Broad -Crested Rectangular Weir ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 62641-047 Pond Revised 8-18-05 Type f124-hrNURP Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by Schnell & Madson, Inc. Page 2 H droCAD® 7.00 sln 001876 O 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 8/26/2005 Pond 2P: Pond Hydrograph 10 11 12 13 limo (hours) 20 0 Existing Area Proposed To Pond 0 Proposed To Wetlands/Offsite Pond k. 46 62641-047 Snowmelt Huff 0-10sm 3Q 240.00 hrs Snowmelt Rainfall=7.00" Prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Page 2 HydroCAD(D-7.00 s1n 001876 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 8/26/2005 Subcatchment IS: Proposed To Pond Runoff = 2.34 cfs @ 156.18 hrs, Volume= 17.640 af, Depth= 7.00" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-250.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Huff 0-10sm 3Q 240.00 hrs Snowmelt Rainfall=7.W' Area (ac) CN Description 30-240 100 Frozen Ground Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description 20.0 Direct Entry, .2 LL Subcatchment IS: Proposed To Pond Hydrograph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . so 2W 210 22 10 n 30 40 50 60 6 " Time (hours) 230 740 55i t? :lot. 62641-047 Snowmelt Huff0-90sm 3Q 240.00 hrs Snowmelt Rainfall=7.00" Prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Page 3 W droCACO 7.00 s/n 001876 01986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 8/26/2005 Subcatchment 3S: Existing Area Runoff = 2.77 cfs @ 156.24 hrs, Volume= 20.848 af, Depth= 7.00" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-250.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Huff 0-10sm 3Q 240.00 hrs Snowmelt Rainfall=7.00" AreaJac) CN Descri Lion 35.740 100 Frozen Ground Tc Length Slope cfs Description 25.0 Direct Entry, u 3 0 L6 Subcatchment 3S: Existing Area Hydrograph 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 t40 150 160 170 M 190 200 210 220 230 240 2-S Time (hours) 7 62641-047 Snowmelt Huff 0-10sm 3Q 240.00 hrs Snowmelt Rainfall=7.00" Prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Page 4 HydroCADO 7.00 sfn 001876 ©1986-2003 A lied Microcomputer Systems 8/26/2005 Subcatchment 4S: Proposed To Wetlands/Offsite Runoff - 0.43 cfs @ 156.09 hrs, Volume= 3.208 af, Depth= 7.00" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-250.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Huff 0-10sm 3Q 240.00 hrs Snowmelt Rainfall=7.00" Area ac CN Description 5.500 100 Frozen Ground Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description —(min) (feet) (f#/ft) _ (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 4S: Proposed To Wetlands/Offsite 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 lime (hours) 62641-047 Snowmelt Huff 0-10sm 3Q 240.00 hrs Snowmelf Rainfall=7.00" Prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Page 5 H droCADO 7.00 s/n 001876 01986-2003 Applied Microcom uter Systems 8/26/2005 Pond 2P: Pond Inflow Area = 30.240 ac, Inflow Depth = 7.00" for Snowmelt event Inflow, - 2.34 cfs @ 156.18 hrs, Volume= 17.640 of Outflow - 2.33 cfs @ 156.68 hrs, Volume= 17.561 af, Atten=1%o, Lag= 29.6 min Primary = 2.33 cfs @ 156.68 hrs, Volume= 17.561 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-250.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 942.00' Surf.Area= 31,049 sf Storage=130,899 cf Peak Elev= 942.70' @ 156.68 hrs Surf.Area= 32,473 sf Storage=154,139 cf (23,240 cf above start) Flood Elev= 950.00' Surf.Area= 43,885 sf Storage= 354,795 cf (223,896 cf above start) Plug -Flow detention time= 2,264.9 min calculated for 14.556 of (83% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 217.6 min ( 8,105.0 - 7,887.4 ) # Invert Avail.Stora a Storage Description 1 936.00' 354,795 of Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store feet s -ft cubio-fef1 cubic -feet 936.00 16,637 0 0 937.00 18,146 17,392 17,392 938.00 19,718 18,932 36,324 939.00 21,351 20,535 56,858 940.00 23,045 22,198 79,056 941.00 24,796 23,921 102,977 942.00 31,049 27,923 130,899 944.00 35,101 66,150 197,049 946.00 39,380 74,481 271,530 948.00 43,885 83,265 354,795 # Routing Invert Outlet Devices 1 Primary 942.00' 36.0" x 30.0' long Culvert RCP, sq.cut end projecting, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert= 941.50' S= 0.0167 T n= 0.012 Cc= 0.900 2 Device 1 942.00' 18.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 3 Device 1 945.50' 60.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C= 0.600 - 4 Device 1 944.50' 5.0' long x 0.5' breadth Broad -Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 Coef. (English) 2.80 2.92 3.08 3.30 3.32 PrimaryOutFlow Max=2.32 cfs @ '156.68 hrs HW=942.70' (Free Discharge) t1=Culvert (Passes 2.32 cfs of 3.60 cfs potential flow) 2=0rificelGrate (Orifice Controls 2.32 cfs @ 2.9 fps) 3=OrificelGrate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) =Broad -Crested Rectangular Weir ( Controls 0.00 cfs) r 62641-047 Snowmelt Huff 0-10sm 3Q 240.00 hrs Snowmelf Rainfall=7.00" Prepared by Scboell & Madson, Inc. Page 6 H droCADO 7.00 s/n 001876_ ©1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 8/26/2005 Pond 2P: Pond Hydrograph 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 25 Time (hours) 1Mlow Primary z� m� n� s 4 i . 1 S NEWDOC v �- O s r C r NEWDOC 4 • [Insert List Name and Address of Local Government Unit Here]City of Chanhassen - 7700 Market Boulevard - P.O. Box 147 - Chanhassen MN 55317 Name of Applicant: Mark Undestad, Eden Trace Com. Application Number: n/a Type of Application (check one): ❑ Exemption Decision ❑ No Loss Decision ❑ Replacement Plan Decision ❑ Banking Plan Decision ® Wetland Type/Boundary Decision Date of Decision: January 11 2005 Check One: ❑Approved ® Approved with conditions List of Addressees: [Landowner] Mark Undestad, Eden Trace Corp. [Members of Technical Evaluation Panel] Greg Graczyk, Carver SWCD Brad Wozney, BWSR ❑ Denied [Watershed District or Watershed Management Organization (If Applicable)] Bob Obermeyer, Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District [Department of Natural Resources Regional Office] Julie Ekman, Area Hydrologist DNR Wetlands Coordinator @ Ecological Services Section 500 Lafayette Road, Box 25 St. Paul, MN 55155 Corp of Engineers Project Manager @ Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District ATTN: CO-R, 190 Fifth Street East St. Paul, MN 55101-1639 [Individual members of the public who requested a copy, summary only] Kenneth Meek, Earth Science Associates, Inc. Minger Delin Notice.doc -Page 1 of 2 (April 2003) F You are hereby notified that the decision of the Local Government Unit on the above - referenced application was made on the date stated above. A copy of the Local Government Unit's Findings and Conclusions is attached. Pursuant to Minn. R. 8420.0250 any appeal of the decision must be commenced by mailing a petition for appeal to the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of the mailing of this Notice. [LOCAL GOVE NT UNIT] 7anuM 11, 2005 Sig ture Date Water Resources Coordinator Title - Page 2 of 2 Minger Delin Notice.doc (April 2003) � .�~ ^ . . � � ^ . ^� ^NEWDOC � ' ^ ` - ' . , ~ . . . . � ` ^ ^ ` . ' ' ' : � ~ � .. . ^ , ' ' � . [Insert List Name and Address of Local Government Unit Here]City of Chanhassen - 7700 Market Boulevard - P.O. Box 147 - Chanhassen MN 55317 Name of Applicant: Mark Undestad, Eden Trace Coro. Application Number: n/a Type of Application (check one): ❑ Exemption Decision ❑ No Loss Decision ❑ Replacement Plan Decision ❑ Banking Plan Decision ® Wetland Type/Boundary Decision Date of Decision: JanuaEy 11 2005 Check One: ❑Approved ® Approved with conditions List of Addressees: [Landowner] Mark Undestad, Eden Trace Corp. [Members of Technical Evaluation Panel] Greg Graczyk, Carver SWCD Brad Wozney, BWSR ❑ Denied [Watershed District or Watershed Management Organization (If Applicable)] Bob Obermeyer, Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District [Department of Natural Resources Regional Office] Julie Ekman, Area Hydrologist DNR Wetlands Coordinator @ Ecological Services Section 500 Lafayette Road, Box 25 St. Paul, MN 55155 Corp of.Engineers Project Manager @ Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District ATTN: CO-R, 190 Fifth Street East St. Paul, MN 55101-1638 [Individual members of the public who requested a copy, summary.only] Kenneth Meek, Earth Science Associates, Inc. -Page I of 2 Minger Delin Notice.doc (April 2003) You are hereby notified that the decision of the Local Government Unit on the above - referenced application was made on the date stated above. A copy of the Local Government-Unit's Findings and Conclusions is attached. Pursuant to Minn. R. 8420.0250.any appeal of the decision must be commenced by mailing a petition for appeal to the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of the mailing of this Notice. [LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT] C Si ;lure Water Resources Coordinator Title JanuM 11, 2005 Date - Page 2 of 2 Minger Delin Notice.doc (April 2003) FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard • P.O. Box 147 • Chanhassen, MN 55317 Nance of Applicant: Mark Undestad, Eden Trace Co . Project Location: SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 16 T11f)N R23W in Chanhassen MN Type of Application (check one): Date of Decision: January 11. 2005 E Delineation Decision 0 Exemption Decision ❑ No Loss Decision ❑ Replacement Plan Decision ❑ Banking Plan Decision' Findings and Conclusions On December 28, 2004, the applicant submitted a wetland delineation of the above site. On December 30, 2004, City staff met the delineator on -site to check the delineated wetland boundary, as included in the report by Earth Science Associates, Inc. dated October 2004 (Figure 2). Due to the lateness of the season and the absence of delineation flags due to harvesting of crops, it was not possible to make an on -site determination of wetland boundaries. On January 5, 2005, City staff met Greg Graczyk of the Carver Soil and Water District at the District office in Waconia to review aerial photography of the site. Photos from 1979 to 2000 were reviewed. Based on the site visit and aerial photography review, City staff makes the following findings: 1. Basin F .1-30. This area has historically been farmed and tiled. Despite the presence of the tile, the area supports all three wetland criteria. This basin is a jurisdictional wetland. 2. Basin F 31-34. Due to the scale of the photographs and the size of the basin, staff is unable to identify it on aerial photography. Further on -site investigation is warranted. No determination is made on this basin at this time. 3. Basin F 35-50. Aerial photography indicates that this basin extends further to the south than shown on Figure 2 of the wetland delineation report. The delineator and staff should conduct additional field work, especially in the area just south of the notation "F 35-50" on Figure 2, to determine if the wetland boundary should be adjusted in this area. While a jurisdictional wetland exists in this location, the boundary shown on Figure 2 may be incorrect. Further on -site investigation is warranted. 4. Basin F 51-80, Northern Portion: This basin appears to be the result of excavation and/or mining of upland areas. This basin is determined to be incidental and exempt under the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420.0122 Subp. 5C). 5. Basin F 51-80, Southern Portion: This basin used to be a reed canary grass meadow that was occasionally farmed. The western portion was excavated, which changed the wetland type, apparently in conjunction with the construction of the industrial park to the west. The eastern portion has been degraded as a result of excavation and filling at different times, starting in the mid to late 1980s, prior to the adoption of the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act. This basin is a jurisdictional wetland. 6. Basin F 81-86 and Basin F 87-90: These basins exist on aerial photography in 1979, prior to the installation of the north/south driveway from Lyman Boulevard. The basins have long been connected as a drainageway from the south-central portion of the property to the southern part of Basin F 51-80. These basins are jurisdictional wetland. 7. Basin F 91-97. Based on the review of aerial photography, there is no evidence that this basin has existed historically. In addition, the construction of a berm to the north of this basin in the early 1980s (according to the property owner) appears to have caused water to impound south of it. This basin is determined to be incidental and exempt under the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act.(MR 8420.0122 Subp. SC). 8. Sample Point 4: Although the area at sample point 4 appears to have hydric soils (based on the Carver County Soil Survey), there is no indication on the aerial photography that this area is wetland. Summary Basin Status F 1-30 Jurisdictional wetland; delineation approved. F 31-34 Requires further investi ation. F 35-50 Re uires further investi ation F 51-80, North Incidental wetland; impacts exempt. F 51-80, South Jurisdictional wetland; delineation a22roved. F 81-86 Jurisdictional wetland; delineation a2proved. F 87-90 Jurisdictional wetland; delineation a22roved. F 91-97 Incidental wetland; impacts exempt. Sam le Point 4 Nonwetland CITY OF CHANHASSEN i By � Title: Water Resources Coordinator Date: January 11, 2005 . February 10, 2005 G�TY OF G11fll1IIS� Mr. Mark Undestad Mr. Ken Meek [aIlH11IIHfJ�I Eden Trace Corp. Earth Science Associates, Inc. 7700MarketBouircd 8156.Mallory Court 37445 Grand Avenue PO Box147 Chanhassen, MN 5531.7 North Branch, MN 55056 Ctianrr,t�r5531r : Administration Pt=952227.1100 Re: Review of Wetland Delineation on the Minger Property Fax 952227.1110 SE 1/a of the SE'/a of Section 16 T 116; R 23 � Chanhassen, MN Building Inspections. RM952227.1180 Dear Mark and Ken: fa c W227.119D Engineering I am in receipt of the January 19, 2005 memorandum from Ken regarding the Pt)=952.227.1160 revision of the wetland delineation on the above property. Based on winter Fa�c952227.117t1 field conditions and a lack of other information from the site, I am still unable Finance to conclusively determine the presence and/or extent _of wetlands in two areas: Rm %222r.114f1 Fn%2.227.111D 1. Basin F 31-34; and Park & Recreation 2. Basi6'F 3- 5-50 ftlt %222r.1120 _~ Fax952.22r.111D � � � t Once the growing season begins {approximately April 15), ,I w111 v1s1t the site �10f1 2310Coate Boulevard again to make'a final deierrivnation of these tvvo areas ¢. f Phan 95222r.1400 Fax 95222r.14o1 If you anticipate pursuing City approval between now and Apnl, please contact me so we cam determme a --pre ferred course of action Planning & F Natural Resources 0h=952.227.1130 If you have questions, please feel free to contactme, at 951=7 1135 Fay 952227,111D - = Public Works Sincerely; I'txm952.22r.1300 CITY OF CHANHASSEN- Fk 952.227.131D - Senior Center Phom 95222r.1125 Fair 952227.111D Lori Hank = Web Site Water Resouirces, Coordinator The City atChanhassen •Agrowing corrarNrniiywith dean takes, glial rStilOG1S,adianmrgdawritovitr,ttiririsgDusrasses,windngtrails. arkbeautifulparksAgloatplacetotine,-work,aWplay.. NEWDOC h S .,� V FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard • P.O. Box 1.47 • Chanhassen, MN 55317 Name of Applicant: - Mark Undestad, Eden Trace Com. Project Location: SE 1/a of the SE'/a of Section 16 T116N R23W in Chanhassen MN Type of Application (check one): Date of Decision: January 11, 2005 0 Delineation Decision Exemption Decision ❑ No Loss Decision ❑ Replacement Plan Decision ❑ Banking Plan Decision Findings and Conclusions On December 28, 2004, the applicant submitted a wetland delineation of the above site. On December 30, 2004, City staff met the delineator on -site to check the delineated wetland boundary, as included in the report by Earth Science Associates, Inc. dated October 2004 (Figure 2). Due to the lateness of the season and the absence of delineation flags due to harvesting of crops, it was not possible to make an on -site determination of wetland boundaries. On January 5, 2005, City staff met Greg Graczyk of the Carver Soil and Water District at the District office in Waconia to review aerial photography of the site. Photos from 1979 to 2000 were reviewed. Based on the site visit and aerial photography review, City staff makes the following findings: 1. Basin F I-30: This area has historically been farmed and tiled. Despite the presence of the tile, the area supports all three wetland criteria. This basin is a jurisdictional wetland. 2. Basin F 3.1-34: Due to the scale of the photographs and the size of the basin, staff is unable to identify it on aerial photography. Further on -site investigation is warranted. No determination is made on this basin at this time. 3. Basin F 35-50: Aerial photography indicates that this basin extends further to the south than shown on Figure 2 of the wetland delineation report. The delineator and staff should conduct additional field work, especially in the area just south of the notation "F 35-50" on Figure 2, to determine if the wetland boundary should be adjusted in this area. While a jurisdictional wetland exists in this location, the boundary shown on Figure 2 may be incorrect. Further on -site investigation is warranted. 4. Basin F 51-80, Northern Portion: This basin appears to be the result of excavation and/or mining of upland areas. This basin is determined to be incidental and exempt under the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420.0122 Subp. 5C). 5. Basin F 5.1-80, Southern Portion: This basin used to be a reed canary grass meadow that was occasionally farmed. The western portion was excavated, which changed the wetland type, apparently in conjunction with the construction of the industrial park to the west. The eastern portion has been degraded as a result of excavation and filling at different times, starting in the mid to late 1980s, prior to the adoption of the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act. This basin is a jurisdictional wetland. 6. Basin F 81-86 and Basin F 87-90: These basins exist on aerial photography in 1979, prior to the installation of the north/south driveway from Lyman Boulevard. The basins have long been connected as a drainageway from the south-central portion of the property to the southern part of Basin F 51-80. These basins are jurisdictional wetland. 7. Basin F 91-97: Based on the review of aerial photography, there is no evidence that this basin has existed historically. In addition, the construction of a berm to the north of this basin in the early 1980s (according to the property owner) appears to have caused water to impound south of it. This basin is determined to be incidental and exempt under the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420.0122 Subp. 5C). 8. Sample Point 4: Although the area at sample point 4 appears to have hydrie soils (based on the Carver County Soil Survey), there is no indication on the aerial photography that this area is wetland. Summary Basin Status F 1-30 Jurisdictional wetland; delineation a roved. F 31-34 Re uires further investigation. F 35-50 Re uires further investigation F 51-80, North Incidental wetland; im acts exem t. F 51-80, South Jurisdictional wetland; delineation ap2roved. F 81-86 Jurisdictional wetland; delineation approved. F 87790 Jurisdictional wetland; delineation approved. F 91-97 Incidental wetland; impacts; exempt. Sample Point 4 Nonwetland CITY OF CHANHASSEN By Title: Water Resources Coordinator Date: January 11, 2005 Z �e �r �w " O^ f �w 1 NEWDOC NEWDOC �K EARTH SCIENCE ASSOCIATES, INC. RAF Environmental CqnsuldnZ Spent 2005 Memorandum ' CITY OF CHANHASSEN Date: January 19, 2005 Name of Recipient: Lori Haak, Water Resources Coordinator CompanylLocation: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 RE: Revision of Wetland Delineation in SE114 of the Si 114 of Section 16, TA16, R.23, Carver Co., Chanhassen, MN Following review of the Findings and Conclusions dated January 11, 2005 from the City of Chanhassen, ESA Staff revisited the site on January 19ti. Revisions made follow below: 1. Basin F 1.30: Flags damaged by crop harvesting were replaced. 2. Basin F 31.34: This area appeared to be drained, thereby eliminating the wetland hydrology criteria. No flags remained after harvesting. None were replaced.. 3. Basin F 35-50: Portions of the line were adjusted slightly southward. 4. Basin F 51-80, North: Wetland flagging was removed from this incidental wetland area. 5. Basin F 51-80, South: Wetland flagging was replaced as needed. 6. Basin F 81-86: Wetland flagging was replaced as needed. 7. Basin F 87.90: Wetland flagging was replaced as needed. 8. Basin F 91.97: Wetland flagging was removed from this incidental wetland area. A revised site plan is attached. We appreciate your prompt and courteous attention to this matter. Please contact this office if you have any questions or comments. Respectfully, Earth Science Associates, Inc. Kenne E. Meek, PG, CPG President 1 Hydrogeologist Attachment Cc: Mark Undestad 37445 Grand Avenue telJfax: North Branch; MN 55056 (651) 674-6210 e-mail: earthsci@nsatel.net .� •L NEWDOC a ' t Date: June 20, 2005 To: From: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 Development Plan Referral Agencies Planning Department Please return plans to planning secretary if not needed. Thanks! By: Robert Generous, Senior Planner Subject: Request for Rezoning of property from Agricultural Estate District (A-2) to Planned Unit Development (PUD), Preliminary Plat Approval, and Wetland Alteration Permit on property located on the northwest corner of the intersection of Lyman Boulevard and Galpin Boulevard EChanhassen West7Bu`sinessa Par_, _,__1`Applicant: Eden Trace Corporation Planning Case_. o. D The above described application for approval of a land development proposal was filed with the Chanhassen Planning Department on June 17, 2005. The 60-day review period ends August 1.6, 2005. In order for us to provide a complete analysis of issues for Planning Commission and City Council review, we would appreciate your comments and recommendations concerning the impact of this proposal on traffic circulation, existing and proposed future utility services, storm water drainage, and the need for acquiring public lands or easements for park sites, street extensions or improvements, and utilities. Where specific needs or problems exist, we would like to have a written report to this effect from the agency concerned so that we can make a recommendation to the. Planning Commission and City Council. This application is scheduled for consideration by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on July 19, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Chanhassen City Hall. We would appreciate receiving your comments by no later t1rAfi�.Juiy-8-2 O5, You may also appear at the Planning Commission meeting if you so desire. Your cooperation and assistance is greatly appreciated. 1. City Departments: a. City Engineer b. City Attorney e. City Park Director d. Fire Marshal e. Building Official f. Water Resources Coordinator g. Forester 2. Carver Soil & Water Conservation District 3. MN Dept. of Transportation 4. MN Dept. of Natural Resources 5. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 6. U.S. Fish & Wildlife 7. Carver County a. Engineer b. Environmental Services S. Watershed District Engineer a. Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek b. Lower Minnesota River c. Minnehaha Creek d. Carver County Water Resource Management Area 9. Telephone Company (Qwest and Sprint/United) 1.0. Electric Company (Xcel Energy or MN Valley) 11. Mediacom 12. CenterPoint Energy Minnegasco Location Map Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 8470 Galpin Boulevard City of Chanhassen III amf Vp V FA IA OAO I��II ICI II z--- m o t L • ^ T � R r R ` �• I • NEWDOC -• k NEWDOC -• k r FROM FAX NO. :6516746210 Jan. 11 2005 01:33PM P1 EARTH SCIENCE ASSOCIATES, INC. E ronmental nnsul[in rS cldllsts FacsimiiefMemo randum ' Date: January 11, 2005 Name of Recipient: Lori Haak, Water Resources Coordinator ' CompanylLocation: City of Chanhassen Facsimile Number: 952 227-1935 RE: Incidental Wetlands at Minger Construction site at 8470 Galpin Avenue Dear Ms. Haak: The enclosed site ptan indicates the proposed incidental wetlands, based on Historical data including aerial photos, historical farming practices, and former tiling for drainage purposes. If you agree with the proposed revisions, please let us know. We will then freshen & revise the vietland boundary flags in the field and prepare the appropriate WCA exemption form for incidental wetlands. Respectfully, Earth Science Assocl t ne. Kenneth E. Meek, PG, CPG Cc, Mark Undestad, Eden7race Corporation 37445 Grand Avenue } tel.lfax: North Branch, MN 55056 (651) 674-6210 e-mail: earthsci@nsatel.net v W. TIR'� • 719W US -"A;. T' r.Wp gz i yr_%g 4 PAK "WT IX Q1. 7•6 a! W y,.l .17 OF clip Xe 01M k 7- 4 W Jffi, .1 , .. - - - ^~�-_------� ' . ~, ' ^" �% ~ 'w ' � ~ 2 r o I •O YP � • ! J �Q� S 9L c --t 727- .�/V Ylt,613 - r Ue ///S)l��•r''�/� n+/� ,11'v.�lSVOLAI Lb-1. NEWDOC o� h :• NEWDOC 4 r c / 4 Name and Address of Local Government Unit: City of Chanhassen — 7700 Market Boulevard — P.O. Box 147 — Chanhassen, MN 55317 Name of Applicant: Eden Trace Corporation Project Name: Chanhassen West Business Park Application Number: 05-23 Type of Application (check one): ® Exemption Decision ® No Loss Decision ® Replacement Plan Decision ❑ Banking Plan Decision ❑ Wetland Type/Boundary Decision Date of Decision: October 11, 2005 Check One: ❑ Approved ® Approved with conditions (see note on page 2 regarding use of wetland banking credits) Denied Summary of Project/Decision (indicate exemption number per MN Rule 8420.0122, if applicable): The applicant has reouested three incidental wetland exemptions (MR 8420.0122 subp-5) for Basins F 51-80 N, Basin F 91-97 and Basin A and a no -loss determination for Basin F 31-34.The applicant has also requested a permit for fill of three (3) wetland basins _totalin�0.54 acres. Wetland replacement will take place on -site with 0.54 acres of new wetland credit throe h wetland creation and 1.12 acres of public value credit through storm water ponding. List of Addressees: Landowner. - Eden Trace Corporation Members of Technical Evaluation Panel: Greg Graczyk, Carver SWCD Brad Wozney, BWSR Watershed District or Watershed Management Organization (If Applicable): Paul Moline, Carver County Department of Natural. Resources Regional Offrce (select &PELEMefiate o ce): -Page I of 2 Chan W Business Pk Decision Notice 9/16104 NW Region: NE Region, Central Region: Southem Region: Regional Director Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. Reg. Env. Assess. Fool. Reg. Env. Assess. Eool. 2115 Birchmont Beach Rd. NE Div. Ecol. Services Div. Ecol. Services Div. Ecol. Services Bemidji, MN 56601 1201 E. Hwy.2 1200 Warner Road 261 Hwy. 15 South Grand Rapids, MN 55744 St. Paul, MN 55106 New Ulm. MN 56073 DNR TEP Representative (if different than above) Julie Ekman, Area Hydrologist Joe Yanta, Corp of Engineers Project Manager Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District ATTN: CO-R, 190 Fifth Street East St. Paul, MN 551014638 Individual members of the public who requested a copy, summary only Jerry Backman, Schoell & Madson, Inc. You are hereby notified that the decision of the Local Government Unit on the above - referenced application was made on the date stated above. A copy of the Local Government Unit's Findings and Conclusions is attached. Pursuant to Minn. R. 8420.0250 any appeal of the decision must be commenced by mailing a petition for appeal to the Minnesota. Board of Water and Soil Resources within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of the mailing of this Notice. NOTE: Approval of Wetland Replacement Plan Applications involving the use of wetland banking credits is conditional upon withdrawal of the appropriate credits from the state wetland bank. No wetland impacts may commence until the applicant receives a copy of the fully signed and executed "Application for Withdrawal of Wetland Credits," signed by the BWSR wetland bank administrator certifying that the wetland bank credits have been debited. THIS DECISION ONLY APPLIES TO the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act. Additional approvals or permits from local, state, and federal agencies may be required. Check with all appropriate authorities before commencing work. in or near wetlands. LOCAL QjGOOVVF NT UNIT fit/ October 11, 2005_- Signature Date LoriHaak, Water Resources Coordinator Name and Title Page 2 of 2 Chan W Business Pk Decision Notice 9/16104 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard - P.O. Box 147 - Chanhassen, MN 55317 Name of Applicant: Mark Undestad, Eden Trace Com. Project Location: SE 1/ of the SE 1/ of Section 16, T116N, R23W in Chanhassen, MN Type of Application (check one): Date of Decision: October 11, 2005 ❑ Delineation Decision x❑ Exemption Decision x❑ No Loss Decision Replacement Plan Decision ❑ Banking Plan Decision Findings and Conclusions On August 22, 2005, the Chanhassen City Council approved the Wetland Alteration Permit to fill and alter wetlands within the development, plans prepared by Schoell & Madsen, Inc., dated June 17, 2005, subject to the following conditions: 1. A no loss determination shall be completed for Basin F 31-34. 2. Exemption requests shall be completed for Basins F 51-80 N, Basin F 91-97 and Wetland A. 3. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). A Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for Water/Wetland Projects (Parts I and II) shall be submitted for the proposed project. The application shall include sequencing discussions and sequencing flexibility requests, if applicable. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. 4. A five-year wetland replacement.monitoring plan shall be submitted. The replacement monitoring plan shall include a detailed management plan for invasive non-native species, particularly purple loosestrife and reed canary grass. The plans shall show fixed photo monitoring points for the replacement wetland. The applicant shall provide proof of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland. r 5. Several corrections must be made to the Wetland Mitigation Plan (sheet 10 of 13): a. Wetland A is shown as an impact area. Upon finalization of exemption paperwork, mitigation will not be required for this wetland; b. Wetland C (Basin F 87-90) is 0.05 acres in area; and c. Wetland D (Basin F 81-86) is 0.09 acres in area. 6. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. 7. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of The wetland creation letter of credit. 8. Drainage and utility easements a minimum of 20 feet in width shall be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used as PVC and storm water ponds. 9. Silt. fence shall be installed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond the wetland. 10. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase 11 construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval." CITY OF CHANHASSEN By: Title: Water Resources Coordinator Date: October 11, 2005 s NEWDOC 3 Z� NEWD C J 1 � F Sunset Properties Center Companies Phone 952-368-1900 Eden Trace Corp. Phone 952-448-5977 Fax 952-448-5987 8156 Mallory Court Chanhassen, MN. 55317 Transmittal TO: The City of Chanhassen Date: December 28, 2004 Attn: Lori Haak Project No: File No: Project: Galpin Road Project-� Copies to: Subject: Wetland Delineation Phone 952-361-0722 Fax 952-361-0723 We are sending x❑ Enclosed ❑ Under separate cover Via: Mail ❑ Federal Express x❑ Hand Delivered ❑ Express Mail ❑ UPS ❑ Messenger The Following: Transparencies ❑ Copy of Letter Lease comments Prints ❑ Specifications Leases for Signature Samples ❑ Shop Drawings x Reports Action Required: For your review Prints returned For distribution For your approval Approved Submit specified item x For your use Approved as noted Revise and resubmit x As requested RejectedlResubmit No resubmittal required Copies Date Description I Oct-04 Wetland Delineation Earth Science Associates Remarks: Hi Lori, Here is the report. Thank you for getting to it this week. Let me know if you need anything else at this time. Thank you, Mark Undestad From: Chanhassen Business Center LLP Chanhassen Lakes Bus. Park 3 LLP Chanhassen Lakes Condos, LLC Micro, LLP Sunset Properties Center Companies x Eden Trace Corp. L38, LLP Stone Creek Office Group, LLC EXPERIENCING GOD THROUGH SMALL GROUP PART II i . F SATURDAY -10:30 A.M. "From the time the world was created, people have, seen the earth and,sky and all that God made. They can clearly see his invisible .qualities -phis eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse whatsoever for not knowing ' God. Romans 1:20 Ice Breaker. What is the 1 sense you'd be willing to live without? Why? 1. Did you experience God this morning when we were outside? It so, how? If not, do you think there's a reason you didn't? 2. Have you ever learned anything about God using your 5 senses? 3. Do you think most people get to know God through the things he has made? 4. Do you have to be looking for God to see him? 5. is Paul whimping out in Romans 1:20 by not talking about the evil stuff in the world? What would he say about the things we see that are bad? 6. Do you think it's possible to see and understand God clearly? Why? Why not? 7. Are you certain that God exists?, Why? Why not? d f S;� ; 40.15c. OL OL � 2 577 eL i S •, m---- o e ay �S f •� • aY t i a s ! ' } • i NEWDOC 4 .CHANHASSEN WEST B PLAT ntE NO. Q : r a a a r e ti w' i f _ ,a y w ♦,e KNOW ALL MOi BY THESE PRESENT& That Ueda D. Volk and Jane Vok TwaDad and wMN fee ow'nertr of the kfowhg STAOF TA LOl1NTY OF � < descrbed propertyvtuoted In tins County of Conn. State of Ylimsot4 to wit ` ,That Port of tins -East Half (E1/2) of the SouMeost Quarter (SW1/4N Seetlon Ik Township 115. Rage 23 West, y whkh ties p G �t� mayor. lodged bafar� me this day of 20_ . by _ • South of the North 915,41 feet west of the Celtedhe of Count State Am �Y Y ltlpMaY Na19. and North Of the South . 100.00 feel according to the plot thereof on as or o1 record 1n the office of tine County Recorder, Cover County;=s,�. a Notary PLU$.f'alnty. tlkYnetOta r � s �> _ " = Tlsot part of the South■est Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Sectlon 15% TownshIp 118 North. Range 23 West lying . COUNTY SMVEYOR, Carver County, Minnesota westerly of the cenlerfhe ofthe Canty Stole Aid No 1of the centwtimof Conn' S Fe* MY -Pursuant to Clsopter 395. Ukv+esoto lows of 1971, this plot hot been approved thb day of r < 1& Sold property being sub)ect to easements for roadwayy HWmy County P far g{aw Aid -< _ M9hway M according to the. plat thereof on ris or of record h the ofike, of the County Recorder. Caner County, - r Dy - Excepting from the fb'st Parcel demr1bW above, the fofowiv� < _ ._ Carver CountySixveyor A>f, that part of the South 1SUID feet of the north 10h41-feet of the East 11df of Ms Southeast Ouorter of Section 1t1, Townsh>D 116. Range' 23. Carver: Couislyl Uhnesota 1}hg weatery M the aentwAne of County Stota Ak1 M;hway 19, oocordhg - CHANK lSSOL UNNESIDTA _ • to the Plot thereof on fle or of record h thi office of ow Canty Rowede , Carver County, UWbetoto _ -liom roused the same to be sunayed and platted os pWiIASS04 WEST >M= PARK and do hereby donat@'ond Thb ppOfCwmssN WEST fSPARK was approved a+d accepted by tins City Couvef of the City of Cha*sosseq Mtnnesoto. of o - 4 •' __ ' dedicate to the publicfor pibtio ute forever tins hkjsways, oFd%-and oho dadoating the eosements.fw draifogs and utTlty :. wRh the P vAslait of UYnmtl. Statute, Section 50103.-Subd 2 A% rnonurnant. err set as *Wf od y the yC{t Counci F , _ PaPoses-only am elwwn'on t!». plot• , and os stated on Mb - � _ • plot according to Uhsesota Statutes. SOd.02, Subd 1. _ , • ' In wftfwn whereof sold.Uerfe 0. Vok and Jove Vo% lwabasd and wtie, have caused Mess presents to be d¢red We 'a - CITY wkxL oF,TNE CITY OF Clu A5 " U7m=TA _ < .. day- of . 20_ . 004M Made' M Vok and Jame Vok husband and We. : : � aw . Moyer � � Oak • -_. a - _ p� -'J - s _ _ _ Y ..-< _ -" W • ` n y , - _ !lads Q Vdk - µ-me NMl„ _ At10fTOR By I hereby *wUfy� that there. are no dailnqumt tows Gold for d year prior to 20^ for lard deserted an this plat" and - Jana Volk tr"fer entand DaW thh day of 20_ Mark U d7&% Carver County Author , <1 STATE OF LOWA DTA _ By COt#M OF ' . forego4ng hsln+ment was odawdedged belare rrse tint = day of , 20_ . by _ COUNTY : in • of Made D• Volk and Jame VoRc. • husband arsd wWe = I hereby cortify t poyobls for theyear 2�r for Lands desabod on this plot GHANl1ASSf}7 WFST,MIE55 ; < have PARK pold M1s _ Coy of 20_, . s 'c y r Notary PublJq Cant . Minnesota Tom Kerber, Corer Connly.Trwstwer , w My Cammlssbn es , • 20 By a _ hereby certify that 1 haul urisyed and plotted Nee property dsacrbed am Ws plot os.CStJJ�lA55TN WEST PARK; _ OOUMY RECORDER . CITY OF 6H CliATJ}�q$SSN thot.M° Dplotis a comect'representation of tins nmy. that of dtstanoss are oorroctly stsown an the plat Infeet and -was < RECEIVED ED �bd t of o foot Mot of morvnsents w0 be correctly placed InW» ground os char% Inocoordance to Minnesota °. I hereby certify that Mb Plat of GI&WASSM WEST MESS PARK fled this ` day - = Statute% Section 5MO2. Snbd ,1; !hot the out" b&oWwy lines we awreety designated an M. plat and that there ors 20-. of - c dock `A as Doowmt Nvnber :: 3 ':F4 wet lands as defined In MMesoto Statutes Sectbn WS.M Subd' 1 or pubft Ngh" to be deOgnoted other than SC �. � c 2005 . '. • - ^o x - - y Recorder _ iy � HASSEIN PLANNING D EFF _ x .'Da1E0i-Q N'kkda, land Surveyor Mh+esoto Llcernee Na 19834 _ : = •• SCHOELL & MADSON, ENGINEERS SU * PLANNERS *� SURVEYORS SOIL TESTING ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES , . P . . . .. . . < . , • - ♦ . >. _ • < . < _ e , _ • , a ♦ . , r - . ♦ . _ _ - SHEET i OF 2 SHEETS _ _ SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS . 1 a®s NEWDOC o� � 1 }•- •� NEWDOC Schoell & Madson, Inc. —16Em*"ft-ft - Survoyft 0 plx� � �osaws-na-w�s+saoea �an+asr.�►rtare.no fx rwr wr"2 . 5=-w si+a,r d07D 2oCx6 - w W�l s+aaoea Project Name/Locatiom Wetland Mitigatlon Chanhassen West Business Park sent Name: Eden Trace Corp. July 8, 2005 60 SCALE SMIPROJEC; # 62641-047 n . ........... ........... . ................ . : SCALE: : • HORIZ: 1 "=50' • VERT: 1 "=5' 960 PROPOSED SURFACE .... ... ...................... 950 ? • • • • • • • :`• • • • • • • 'PRQP'OSED' WETLAND AREA • y EXISTING EXISTING GROUP D WETLAND AREA 940 : , ....... • .... ............ . n ........ ........ ......... nA TrrA,r FT.RV 930.00 00 N to �- o to rn to o 0 0 cD cD cD O O O oil "11 0+00 0+50 1 +00 1 +50 2+00 Carver County Water Management-- Department of Planning &Zoning 6W East 4°i Street Chaska, Iota 55318 Phone: (952)361-1820 Fax: (952)361.1828 www.00.carver.mn ter Memo To: Robert Generous, City of Chanhassen From: Paul Moline, Carver County Water Management Date: 702005 Re: Chanhassen West Business park (County Water Project 20050038) CC. Lori Haak, City of Chanhassen Ben Merriman, Center Companies Aaron Mlynek, Carver SWCD Enclosures: none Carver County Water Management is offering comments on the Chanhassen West Business Park in the City of Chanhassen. The County is the Watershed authority for this portion of Chanhassen and will need to receive an application for Water Management Rule approval prior to construction. These Rules cover stormwater and erosion & sediment control issues on the site. The County met with the City and the applicant on June 16. Issues: • Prior to approval, the County will need to receive an application, fee and submittal of the following information (detailed requirements can be found at www.co.carver.mn.us/Divisions/LandWaterServices/P7JApplir-ations.htmQ: o Site Plan o Water Features. o Erosion and Sediment Control Plan o Stormwater management plan including hydrologic calculations, existing and proposed drainage, off -site flows, and method for meeting the County's infiltration requirement. Major issues discussed the June 16 meeting were o Infiltration requirement -- applicant discussed ways of incorporating the requirement into swales , parking medians, etc. These details do not show up on plans sent for comment by the City. o Off site flows — ensuring that impact from offshe flows does not create nuisance downstream conditions, particularly to the south and east. Again, the County will need to receive this information and approve the stormwater and erosion & sediment control plans before development begins on the site. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Paul Moline 952.361.1825 pm olln a @co. carver. mn. us NEWDOC Z� MMMMM Y • � x t 4 � e as r NEWDOC r { . v _ t " a �. Schoell & Madson, Inc. - Pianning • Engineering • Surveying s September 22, 2005 Paul Moline , 600 East 4 nyStr Street Management Chaska, MN 55318 Re: SWCD Comments _ ,Chanhassen West Business Park Dear Paul, y This letter is in response to the memo dated 9119/05 from Carver County Water Management in ' regards to the Chanhassen West Business Park project in Chaska. Changes have been made to the plans based on comments in,the memo, and our response is as follows: P Stormwater Issues 1. The calculations for existing conditions should be resubmitted and show the effects of ponding in the northeast wetland. The submitted calculations use sheet flow runoff from 35.74 acres to the southwest wetland, which is not representative of the Existing ; • Drainage figure. The increase In runoff may have impacts on downstream and water quality treatment on site. > The drainage figures and HydroCAD model have been revised to more, - accurately model where runoff from the site ends up. Please refer to the attached, updated storm report. ' 2 Water Quality calculations need to be submitted for review. ➢ The pond has been designed to NURP standards for water quality, the calculations of which can be found in the revised drainage calculations under the NURP rainfall event. In summary, 3.817 of (166,269 cf) of runoff enters the pond during the 2.5" rainfall, and the pond has 176,459 cf of dead pool storage available. Calculations on the sizing of raingardens to accommodate runoff from + the median rainfall event in the Twin Cities area have also been submitted. y Please refer to the attached exhibit. 3. Proposed CNs for greenspace should be raised to C type soils to account for the affect of -compaction. _ ➢ The drainage calculations have been revised to reflect this change. 4. Downstream capacity of the southwest wetland (Outlot A) should be submitted. ➢ The survey provided to us does not contain enough information to determine the capacity of this wetland. in addition to a lack of topographical information from the interior of the wetland, the western boundary of the wetland is not located on the property. 10580 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 1 • Minneapolis, MN 55305-1525 Office_ (952) 546-7603 • Fax (952) 546-9065 _ f www.schoellrnadson.com • 1 f.� 5. The outlet of the northwest wetland (Outlot S) should be submitted. ➢ Information on the inlet from the northwest wetland to the storm sewer pipe along the western boundary has been added to the plans. 6 Rainwater Gardens/lnfrltration - Additlonal details are needed including. ➢ Documentation should be submitted for the volume provided for infiltration. Several basins are noted on the plans, but no calculations are provided • Calculations on the sizing of raingardens to accommodate runoff from the median rainfall event in the Twin Cities are included in an attached exhibit and spreadsheet. In general, the raingardens are sized using the assumption that roof drains will not be used, and that roof runoff will Flow across the parking lot. Raingardens are proposed in as many locations as possible, but site conditions and landscape requirements restricted , the size and number of raingardens, and as such, they are only • proposed where practical. In some cases, the raingardens do not provide enough storage for runoff from the median rainfall event, but it was our opinion that some treatment is better than none at all. ➢ Soils used (sand till or rock fill, 50% clean sand, 25% loamy topsoil, 25% • compost) , • A note has been added to the Landscape plan which specifies that this type of soil should be used forrain garden construction. ➢ - Cross -sections • A typical rain garden cross-section has been provided on the details sheet. - ➢ Erosion control blanket and type ➢ Timing of installation (after contributing area is stabilized). ➢ To reduce initial degradation of basins, It is recommended plugs, shrubs and grasses are used in addition to the 'rainwatergarden seed mix: , • A note has been added to the a Landscape plan which details these items. Erosion Control: 11.' Stable EOF's are needed for the proposed pond on site. The-EOF should be clearly labeled on the plan and a detail is needed. The EOF can be stabilized with a turf re - enforcement mat or fabric and riprap. ➢ A EOI~ has been added to the plans, and a detail has been added to the grading plan. It shall be stabilized with a turf reinforcement mat. 2. Erosion control blanket should be specified in the swale from the FES to the wetland along the west boundary of the site. The blanket specified should adequately protect the area from designed velocity and depth of flow. The blanket and seed in the swale should be installed within 24 hours of culvert installation. All blankets on the plan should be shown as a shaded area. ➢ The swale on the west side of the property has been removed and replaced with storm sewer, so an erosion control blanket will no longer be necessary in that area. 3. Erosion control blanket is recommended for the pond slopes from around 952 to 942 contours. All blanket on the plan should be shown as a shaded area. ➢ An erosion control blanket has been added to pond slopes and designated by a hatch pattern at all locations on the site. 4. Erosion note number 5 should include 2 tons of mulch per acre with seed for stabilization; seed alone is not considered stabilization. ➢ Note #10 on the SWPPP has been changed to reflect the addition of 2 tons of mulch per acre in addition to seeding for final stabilization. 5. All curb cuts need riprap and fabric or sod installed within 24 hours of curb installation. ➢ All curb cuts will have 10 CY of Class IV riprap added. and a note has been added to the grading plan and SWPPP. Broslor Control: 1. Temporary sediment basins are needed prior to disturbing upslope areas. The areas of temporary sediment basins should be labeled on the plan. A temporary outlet is needed for the pond; details should be provided. A temporary outlet could consist of a perforated" riser and rock cone. Temporary basins are needed in the area of the proposed permanent stormwat_er pond; the SE corner of the site prior to discharging to the culvert under Galpin. ➢ Temporary sedimentation basins have been added to the plan in the locations requested, and are clearly labeled. The primary basin (the stormwater pond) will have a temporary outlet, and a detail•has been provided on the details sheet. 2. The Wimco inlet control detail proposed will work for all curbside inlets. Any and all area inlets or drop inlets in paved areas will need alternate controls / Wimco details. The engineer should check on alternate designs for Wmco-type inlet controls to frf the various type of inlets. ➢ A Wimco insert detail for circular manholes and catch basins has been added to the details sheet. 3. Additional inlet controls may be needed for adjacent inlets on Galpin and Street A. ➢ A note has been added to the grading plan instructing the contractor to install _Wimco-type catch basin inserts on all proposed catch basins on Galpin Court (formerly Street A) and on Galpin Blvd. =; 4. Silt fence will be needed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond the wetland. 5. Silt fence needed for Lot 5, Outlot B. S Silt fence needed north of berm in Lot 6 as there is a FES faking "water north off site. 7: Silt fence needed south of Lot 1. a ➢ Silt fence has been added in these locations 8. Each building site will need perimeter controls once the streets are paved and rock exits will be needed as each lot is built -out. ➢ A note has been added to the grading plan detailing this requirement, and since each building will be developed and approved separately, it is likely that this requirement will be met at the time the buildings are built -out. 9. Type 1 and Type 2 silt fence locations need to be specified on the plan. Type 2 should `be installed around all wetland areas and in the SE comer of the site to protect the culvert under Galpin. The SF should be extended along the South side to close the gap in the SF. - ➢ The two types of silt fence have been added to the plans in the areas requested. _ SWPPP Review: _ - Does the SWPPP Narrative: Identify the entity responsible for long term OEM? o The Owners Association has been specified on the SWPPP ' - Do plan sheets identify: Locations and types of sediment basins? o Sediment basin locations have been specified on the plans- r Are Temporary Sedimentation basins. 'o Adequately sized? _ ■ _ - The major sedimentation basin on the site, the stormwater pond, is adequately sized to handle runoff from the entire site. The other _ sedimentation basins are small and will only treat a limited amount of water, but are oversized for the amount of area that wil The draining to them. o Designed to prevent short-circuiting? ■ The sedimentation basin locations should prevent short-circuiting o Are outlets designed to remove floating debris? ' = o Are outlets designed -to allow complete drawdown? ` ■ The temporary outlet is detailed on the details sheet, and will be able ' to remove floating debris acid allow complete drawdown if installed.- - outlets have energy dissipation? o Have a stabilized emergency spillway? ■ The SWPPP instructs the contractor to provide energy dissipation • z and a stabilized emergency spillway. Does the wet sedimentation basin have a stabilized emergency overflow? o The pond has a emergency overflow stabilized with a turn reinforcement mat, = and is detailed on the grading plan. • Are wetted perimeters of ditches stabilized within 200 feet of surface water? o A note has been added to the.SWPPP. There are no swales on the site as of ' the most current plan revision Are sediment control practices established on down gradient perimeters? • o Silt fence has been added to close any gaps on down gradients - • Do stockpiles have sediment control and placed in areas away from surface waters? o A note has been added to the SWPPP instructing sediment control around any stockpiles the contractor may use. If you have any questions or wish to discuss any of these responses, please feel free to contact me at 952-847-9508. Sincerely, Jared Jones,..E.I.T. = Schoell & Madson, Inc. CC: Pat Minger, Minger Construction Aaron Mlynek, Carver SWCD Bob Generous, City of Chanhassen Lori Haak, City of Chanhassen , IIIIIIII IIII III IIIIIII IIIIII IIII IIIIII IIII III IIIINEWCUP NEWCUP #: lo -1 C, I in TRdTir SRD E ADUMONJ +wwawwr.waw'•rW w�w�wzrr�•"'::a: , ,c�w µ: . w ♦ uV ___ ____ l ' _ OUTLOT B - :� ��-__ --___------------- I� w w w w w • • • •. `• • • • • • w w w • i/ w i �_ / - t —+ - � / F35-50 . y �, • wr++ 962----------- j o so 20 1 I BASIN .r r � so 6 - SCALE IN FEET , a.� f ,ur. ,m art a. . .. •- /s ,. . i �g 69 / /' /" — - w w w / ;�/- O EDGE OF tXIIN ST NG" �• V • . /� f / OUTLOT •w•ww OU O C I I I NNNI w w • � t ` \ - • . f / I III- 254 SIFA IF1 f IMPACTED WETLAND AREAS - s \ I O Incidental Q = I 1 \ V ! I I ! 1p .. , , v Iv vvvvvC*� 17 © 0.44 cc II v°v ° - 1\ \ \ t III ° oo �INF51-8(� TH � __ . � � \ \ A, �,::.. � � I I w •�vvo� I I Ievvvv� EDGE OF C; © 0.07 aC III �,v V. L.F vvv - I v v v v v v v WETL v "7 vvv IF 0 0.03 aC I / ` o00° 958 // 2- t �� vv'S'� ova• •, l b v v;v'v 'IV° 1 vvvv TOTAL 0.54 a J°°°°FFI _ _ vv vvvovvv ...i �i� � _..--.-_— — — — — — — — — — m.:, v v v v7v v 1 --- s0— —---------- ------ -- y \ e --_-- J REQUIRED MITIGATION AREA r- ---- -- — — — — — — -------� -- — -- s ' •\ �. — . 0.54 cc x 2 = 1.08 cc40 -T I V 'V -. gill IF�� 1 1 \ I 'v ' 1 1 PROPOSED WETLAND AREAS / ,`1 ��11 � �\� � ' ',1, Ill I I / I �. v I b d I I T NEW WETLAND O 0.54 cc [� i - ! 11 1 ', , v j / _ a O I/ L�,,,� I/,, 1 1 II , 1\ ° CREDITS (MITIGATION) Q o�. PUBLIC VALUE ^ i .: �� J 8 CREDITS (PONDS) OF 1 .1 2 cc - i I.� \\ i I \\ I\ '\ I\ v 7 %1 r TOTAL 1 .66 cc w / \`, ` �i / �� / t j 1t " 1illi ,� i Yam 1 ,IIII �,., �\ 1 I --!C vvvvvvvvvv vvvvvvvvv °°°°°°��° IMPACTED WETLAND vvvvvvvvv 111111` �\ //�956�\\ \\ 3 \ \\\ \\\ 1I 1I >� m - \ \ \ I 1 IIII 6 . W\\\ ,\ I i \ • \ \ \ 111 10 PROPOSED WETLAND BEET =- 1 L--------------_--_>--., — — — — — — — — — ' r \ WET D• � • y. \ WERAND' ... IIII I ,? / I \ ` \�UFFER �SETBA•GfC-►� , �\\ � IIII � - - v` - SI 7 90 I I I PROPOSED WETLAND MITIGATION 11 / OUTLOT A ,r /' ;/�' / \ill \\ ! i • w . • . w w 4. ,,;,,, ,,,� 1;; ;III, ;-. I I •'tl � _ I� ll�. 1� PROPOSED PON BASIN F 51-80 SOUTH I ► / 1 III \ I I 94� HWL=946.6b/ I I u�ii°°._ _ — C• 4 _ ; - l'- 11 ,r.- w w ,• w�E)Q� LXISTING II II III jil°' • WETLAND �! ' 1 IIII a. . w w w w • . . � \ \ III IIII / I I I � ' 1 r . w w • w • r° • w \ \ \ \\ I I : IIII 6� I I ww w w w w w r w r w \\ \\/9... I '. wwswrrww.www ; \\ ►I.,II,I __ w w w • w w w /� II — 960-------- S I wwwr•••w*.rw•r \\ \\\= /77�.-_ I\I 1964`_ _ I w w • • « r•: \-------------' / ,7 �\\\-------------.._. 962 t - -- L-_-_ __e_ _ .w.wwt•- �\ LL 956--! ---------------- - BENCHMARK w a �8 i �V Q� \/� .. _ ..t _ _ - `�! ° 255 56` .i w.__- , _ ti�9JIM i 1. MNDOT control monument JON MNDT along west side of HWY. 41. Elevation = 1027.44 feet (NGVD-1929). —µ--- — 2. MNDOT Control monument HAZE MNDT, along west side of HWY. 41. Elevation = 965.75 feet (NGVD-1929). '�"" _ � 3. SMI Control monument #2 located 14ftt west of westerly edge of I bit, Golpin Blvd, and 391 NW of Power Pole. - - z Elevation = 970.48 feet (NGVD-1929). Revisions Date: Description: By: Date! Description: By: Date: Description: By: 7-6-05 Revised Mitigation_ JB - I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Date: _ Reg. No. Reviewed By:. _ Date: Designed By: Drawn By: Checked By: _ Schooll & Madson, Inc. Engineering • Surveying Y Planning Soil Testing • Environmental Services www.schoelimadson.com 10580 Wayzata Boulevard Minneapolis, Minnesota 55305-1525 phone: (952) 546-7601 - fax: (952) 546-9065 l Client: EDEN TRACE CORP. 8156 MALLORY COURT CHANHASSEN, MN 55305 Project Name/Location: Chanhassen West Business Park Chanhassen, MN Sheet Title: Wetland Mltlgatlon Plan Date. 6-17-05 Sheet: 10ot 13 SMI Project Number: 62641-047 v MMMM! 1 J } NEWDOC S rr L y IMPACTED WETLAND AREAS OO O OO O TOTAL 0.19 cc 0.44 cc --e.eF7 UC 6-01 0.73 cc REQUIRED MITIGATION AREA 0.73 cc x 2 = 1.46 cc PROPOSED WETLAND AREAS NEW WETLAND O 0.73 cc CREDITS (MITIGATION) PUBLIC VALUE O 1.12 cc CREDITS (PONDS) TOTAL 1.85 cc IMPACTED WETLAND PROPOSED WETLAND BENCHMARK 1. MNDOT control monument JON MNDT along west side of HWY. 41. Elevation = 1027.44 feet (NGVD-1929). 2. MNDOT Control monument HAZE MNDT, along west side of HWY. 41. Elevation = 965.75 feet (NGVD-1929). 3. SMI Control monument #2 located 14ftt west of westerly edge of bit, Golpin Blvd, and 39ftt NW of Power Pole. Elevation = 970.48 feet (NGVD-1929). A R 5 4 DUITIONI /2 fil n M e 0 60 120 180 SSCALE I FEET T O t ° sm ()+00 pRl _---A yid fir Y Nli. • � /// � / w -.(1 • � I v . II 4, >\ .l.4H1 * * �\ \30 OUTLOT AII` \� IIII s> reac F.F.. ,-" / Jl 74 *******r***r** - * * * /i / �I1 III -- E=961 `` F. 96 VOL * r * r r r r r • r • r • - / ., �i �•, . � III 1 N I * /iili Illi I PROPOSED POND Ali III ` I...... a_ — tills NWL 942.00// r*/.�H�WL=/94s.eIIh0)I EXISTIN* I _962EC EE OtE�N► so 1. ° ,. 'ETV Revisions Date: Description: By: Date: Description: By: Date: Description: By: 7-6-05 Revised Mitigation JB I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Date: Reg. No. Reviewed By:. Date: . 1 Designed By: Drawn By: Checked By: Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineering • Surveying r Planning Soil Testing • Environmental Services www.schoellmadson.com 10580 Wayzata Boulevard Minneapolis, Minnesota 55305-1525 phone: (952)546-7601- fax: (952)546-9065 l Client: EDEN TRACE CORP. 8156 MALLORY COURT CHANHASSEN, MN 55305 1255 9b19 6TP� �56 119 Project Name/Location: Chanhassen West Business Park Chanhassen, MN Sheet Title: Wetland Mitigation Plan CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED JUL 0 7 2005 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT Date: 8-17-06 Sheet: 10of13 SMI Project Number: 62641-047 S 1 Z ter_ m—� o a Y s � k r NEWDOC i Y } ♦. r r � � r �r IMPACTED WETLAND AREAS OIncidentcl ° © 0.44 cc 0 0.07 cc O0.03 cc -- TOTAL 0.54 cc REQUIRED MITIGATION AREA 0.54 cc x 2 = 1.08 cc PROPOSED WETLAND AREAS NEW WETLAND OO CREDITS (MITIGATION) PUBLIC VALUE O CREDITS (PONDS) TOTAL WAA 0.54 cc 1.12 cc 1.66 cc M PACTED WETLAND PROPOSED WETLAND 1. MNDOT control monument JON MNDT along west side of HWY. 41. Elevation = 1027.44 feet (NGVD-1929). 2. MNDOT Control monument HAZE MNDT, along west side of HWY. 41. Elevation = 965.75 feet (NGVD-1929). 3. SMI Control monument #2 located 14ftt west of westerly edge of bit, Galpin Blvd, and 39ftt NW of Power Pole. Elevation = 970.48 feet (NGVD-1929). CATCH BASIN - RIM = 952.4 CMP CULVERT INV = 953.5 12" P VC=VERT- ` IN+tr-949.9 Q,.a 17771 ZZ Fo N J W m Revisions Date: Description: By: Date: Description: By: Date: Description: By: 7-6-05 Revised Mitigation JB I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Date:. Reg. No. Reviewed By:. Date: — I Designed By: Drawn By: Checked By: Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineering • Surveying a Planning _ Soil Testing • Environmental Services www.schoellmadson.com 10580 Wayzata Boulevard Minneapolis, Minnesota 55305-1525 phone: (952) 546-7601 - fax: (952) 546-9065 1 Client: EDEN TRACE CORP. 8156 MALLORY COURT CHANHASSEN, MN 55305 :s Project Name/Location: =Date:Chanhassen West Business Park Chanhassen, MN Sheet Title: Sheet: Wetland Mitigation Plan 10of 13 SMI Project Number: 62641-047 1 s F NEWDOG.` a A Wetland Delineation 8470 Galpin Boulevard Chanhassen, Minnesota 55316 Prepared on Behalf of Patrick J. Minger, President Minger Construction, Inc. P.O. Box 236 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55316 Prepared by: Earth Science Associates, Inc. 37445 Grand Avenue 1 North Branch, Minnesota . 55056 ESA Project #154-944 October 2004 A Wetland Delineation 8470 Galpin Boulevard Chanhassen, Minnesota 55316 Prepared on Behalf of Patrick J. Minger, President Minger Construction, Inc. P.O. Box 236 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55316 Prepared by: Earth Science Associates, Inc. 37445 Grand Avenue North Branch, Minnesota 55056 - ESA Project #154 904 October 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 2.0 SITE SUMMARY 3.0 BACKGROUND 4.0 METHODOLOGY 5.0 REVIEW OF EXISTING INFORMATION 5.1 Regional Soils and Geology 5.2 USGS 7.5" Topographic Map 5.3 Federal Wetlands Inventory Map 5.4 USDA Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey 5.5 Dept. of Natural Resources Protected Waters Map 5.6 Historical Aerial Photo Review 6.0 SITE VISIT 7.0 STANDARD OF CARE 8.0 REFERENCES FIGURES Figure 1 Location Map Figure 2 Site Plan Figure 3 USGS 7.5" Topographic Map Figure 4 USDA N.R.C.S. Soils Map Figure 5 National Wetlands Inventory Map Figure 6 Minnesota DNR Protected Waters Inventory Map Figure 7 Historical Aerial Photos—1968,1979, 1989, 1991 Figure 8 Photographs Wetland Key WETLAND DATA FORMS O1.0 INTRODUCTION As authorized by Patrick Minger, President of Minger Construction, Inc., Earth Science Associates, Inc., has conducted a wetland delineation on approximately 40 acres atl . the northwest intersection of Galpin and Lyman Boulevards in Chanhassen, Minnesota. Figure I depicts the site location, and Figure 2 an aerial site map. The objective of this report is to identify areas on the subject property which meet the criteria for jurisdictional wetland in accordance with the 1987 Army Corps of Engineers Wctland Delineation Manual and the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act. Findings presented in this report are based on a review of existing information, followed by field investigation. 2.0 SITE SUMMARY A discussion of observations, methods, and information collected is presented in the subsequent sections. Based on review of available information and a site visit, the findings are summarized as follows: 1. Following a review of existing information, the subject property was visited. Soil and vegetation samples were collected from possible wetland areas and uplands as applicable (see Figure 2). The areas which meet wetland criteria consist primarily of wet meadow (type 2 wetland), and in the southwest part of the site, excavated deep marsh (type 4 wetland). Upland portions of the site consist of cultivated soybeans, upland meadow, deciduous woods, and stockpile soil. Based on the site visit and review of historical aerial photos dating back to 1968 (Figure 7), plus review of existing information (Figures 3-6), it appears that alteration to the surrounding area and the subject property has altered the historical wetland configurations. • Wetland basins F1-30 and F31-34 are remnant type 2 wetlands in a soybean field. This area had been tiled many years ago (prior to the oldest aerial photo dates) to remove 1 wetland hydrology from most of this area which had likely been a type 3 wetland (shallow marsh). The tile system is presently maintained. • pp Sample location 4 appears to have been a small isolated wetland basin, but now has a p catch basin a short distance northeast to remove storm runoff from the residential deve lopment adjacent to the north. • A large berm, about 20 to 30 feet high, extends along most of the west property boundary. In addition, much soil has been stockpiled in the southwest quarter of the site. These items appear to have caused "incidental wetland" to have formed. Specifically, the north part of wetland area F51-80 appears to be an "incidental wetland" formed as the result of the berm and stockpiled soil. ' The south portion of wetland area 51-80 has been excavated. This area had been farmed lowland until 1979. 2. Review of existing information regarding wetlands indicates the following: A. The USGS 7.5-minute topographic series map (Figure 3) indicates wetland in the northeast portion of the site. A more recent excavation is indicated in the southwest corner. B. The NRCS soils map of the subject property (Figure 4) indicates mapping units MK-Houghton and Muscego soils, PM-Klossner much GL-Glencoe clay loam, CS-Canisteo silty clay loam, and CO -Cordova clay loam on portions of the site. These are typically very poorly drained soils, indicating the possible presence of wetland. C. The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Map (Figure 5) indicates a wetland areas mapped PEMC, and PUBGx on the site. The NWI maps typically do not cover farmed areas. See the Wetland Key at the end of the Figures for an explanation of these units. t D. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Protected Waters Inventory (PWI) map does not indicate protected waters or wetland on the site (see Figure 6). ' E. Historical aerial photos dating from 1968, 1979, 1989, and 1991 are presented in Figure 7. The aerial photos indicate: a) Wetland 1-30 and 31-34, are in a tiled area, have remained .fairly constant, confirming that the tile system has been in place for several years; b) The south part of wetland 51-80 was excavated sometime between 1979 and 1989. This area had previousely been a farmed wetland; and c) The north part of wetland 51-80 has been created by stockpiled soil in the southwest part of the site and a berm along the west property boundary. Wetland boundaries have been marked on the property with sequentially numbered flags that read "Wetland Boundary" or "Wetland Delineation". Wetland boundary locations are shown on Figure 2. Photographs of wetland and upland sample locations are found in Figure 8. Wetland data forms attached to this report further document the findings. Discussion: Incidental wetlands are exempt from replacement plans under the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (Minn. Rule 8420.0122, Subpart 5). Under this rule "Wetland areas may be drained, excavated, or filled if the landowner can show that the wetland was created solely by actions, the purpose of which was not to create the wetland.". The incidental wetlands identified by this investigation include: • The north portion of wetland 51-80. The remaining wetland areas would require a wetland replacement plan in order to be drained, filled, or excavated. 3.0 BACKGROUND In order to provide an understanding of the reason for wetland delineation, a brief overview of wetland regulations is included in this report. The Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) of 1991 is codified in the 1991 Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 354, and amended by laws in 1.993, Chapter 175. The Wetland Conservation Act has been further modified in subsequent legislative sessions. The Board of Water and Soil Resources (BOWSR) has subsequently promulgated rules for administering the Act. The purpose of the Act and Rules is to: 1) Achieve no net loss in quantity, quality, and biological diversity of state wetlands; 2) Increase the quantity, quality, and biological diversity of state wetlands; 3) Avoid impacts that destroy or diminish the quantity, quality, and biological diversity of state wetlands; and 4) Replace wetland values where avoidance of impact is not feasible. Administration and enforcement of the Act is largely the responsibility of the local governing unit. Generally, no person shall drain or fill a wetland, wholly or partially, without first having a wetland value replacement plan approved by the governing body of the local governing unit. Wetland areas can be used for pasture or cropland during dry periods, provided that such use does not drain or fill the wetland. 3 4 4.0 METHODOLOGY ' Wetlands were evaluated according to the criteria defined in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Technical Report Y-87-1). The Minnesota Wetland Delineation Field Guide, which provides useful reference pertaining to Minnesota wetlands, was also used. Additional information from the DNR pamphlet Wetland T es and Definitions was utilized in the determination and classification of potential wetland areas. This pamphlet unifies the two wetland classification systems from Circular 39 Wetlands of the United States 1971 Edition, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, and the more recent publication from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Classification of Wetlands and Dee water Habitats of the United States (FWS/OBS - 79/31 December 1979). Various other technical manuals and reference books were utilized 1 during the wetland delineation (see References). The purpose of the Corps of Engineers Manual and the Minnesota Wetland Delineation Field Guide is to provide users with mandatory technical criteria and other sources of information and recommended methods to determine whether an area is jurisdictional wetland or not, and to determine the upper boundary of these wetlands. Three essential characteristics are required for an area to be defined as a wetland: 1) hydrophytic vegetation; 2) hydric soils; and 3) wetland hydrology. With few exceptions, all three of these characteristics must be met, according to the technical criteria for each, for an area to be classified as a wetland. Wetland delineation methods utilized for this project include both off -site and on -site procedures. Off site procedures consist of reviewing available maps and aerial photos. This is followed with a site visit. Samples of soil and vegetation are required to make an on -site determination of vegetation, soil type, and hydrology as required to complete the Routine Wetland Determination form. 5.0 REVIEW OF EXISTING INFORMATION 5.1 Regional Soils and Hydrogeology r Wetland hydrology is fundamental to the genesis of wetland soils and h dro h is vegetation, as y gY g y p � well as determining the relative values of a possible wetland area. For these reasons, a brief overview of the regional soils and hydrology is included. The site is located on the Altamont Moraine Association which is a glacial deposit associated with the Des Moines Lobe deposited during the late Pleistocene Epoch. Gray to yellowish brown deposits derived from Manitoba and eastern north Dakota are found in this region. Combined silt and clay typically exceeds 50 % of the till material from which the soils are derived from. - Regional drainage is generally poorly defined in this area due to stagnation moraine in a topographically young landscape. Because an on -site hydrogeologic investigation has not been conducted at the subject property, groundwater flow has not been definitively determined. Shallow groundwater flow in this region generally follows surface topography and drainage patterns. 5.2 U.S.G.S. 7.5-Minute Topographic Map One of the first items examined in reviewing existing information is the U.S. Geological Survey 7.5-minute topographic series quadrangle. The site location is shown on the quadrangle in Figure 3. The USGS map provides general indications of landforms, vegetative cover, and waterways. The USGS 7.5-minute topographic series map (Figure 3) indicates wetland in the northeast portion of the site. A more recent excavation is indicated in the southwest corner. 5.3 USDA NRCS - Natural Resource Conservation Service Soil Survey The most recent soil survey for Carver County was issued in 1971. The field mapping was completed in 1967-8 and is indicative of conditions encountered at that time. Figure 4 illustrates the soil survey map. The NRCS soils map of the subject property (Figure 4) indicates mapping units MK-Houghton and Muscego soils, PM-Klossner much GL-Glencoe clay loam, CS-Canisteo silty clay loam, and ` CO -Cordova clay loam on portions of the site. These are typically very poorly drained soils, indicating the possible presence of wetland. 7 5.4 National Wetlands Inventory Map The site location on the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Map, prepared by the Federal Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service is shown on Figure 5. The NWI maps are overlain on the U.S. Geological Survey 7.5-minute topographic series maps and are based primarily on aerial reconnaissance. Wetland types are designated in accordance with Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater_Habitats of the United States (FWS/OBS - 79/31 December 1979). The classification system describes the wetland system, class, water regime, and other modifiers. The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Map (Figure 5) indicates a wetland areas mapped PEMC, and PUBGx on the site. The NWI maps typically do not cover farmed areas. See the Wetland Key at the end of the Figures for an explanation of these units. 5.5 Department of Natural Resources Protected Waters According to the DNR pamphlet Minnesota's Protected Waters and Wetlands Permit Program " `Wetlands,' which are regulated and protected under Minnesota law, include and are limited to all types 3, 4, and 5 wetlands that have not been designated as `protected waters', which are 10 or more acres in size in unincorporated areas, or 2-1/2 or more acres in size in incorporated areas. The wetland types are defined in Circular 39, Wetlands of the United States, 1971 Edition, U.S. Dept, of the Interior." The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Protected Waters inventory (PWI) map does not indicate protected waters or wetland on the site (see Figure 6). s t 8 5.6 Historical Aerial Photo Review Given the topography combined with relatively impermeable soils covering most of the site, it became necessary to review historical aerial photography in order to determine prevalent wetland conditions. The current on-line version of the Army Corps of Engineers 1987 Wetland Delineation .Manual, page 21, refers the reader to the USDA — NRCS hydric soil definition and criteria. Frequently flooded, ponded, saturated is defined as: "a frequency class in which flooding, ponding, or satuation is likely to occur under usual weather conditions (more than 50- percent chance in any year, or more than 50 times in 100 years)." Using this criteria, historical aerial photos were review for evidence of ponding, flooding, or crop stress due to wetness. Historical aerial photos dating from 1968, 1979, 1989, and 1991 are presented in Figure 7. The aerial photos indicate: a) Wetland 1-30 and 31-34, are in a tiled area, have remained fairly constant, confirming that the the system has been in place for several years; b) The south part of wetland 51-80 was excavated sometime between 1979 and 1989. This area had previousely been a farmed wetland; and c) The north part of wetland 51-80 has been created by stockpiled soil in the southwest part of the site and a berm along the west property boundary. 6.0 SITE VISIT Following an assessment of the existing information as described in the previous sections, the Intermediate On -Site Method, in accordance with the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and the Minnesota Wetland Delineation Field Guide, was utilized. Soil and vegetation samples were collected to determine wetland boundaries (see Figure 2). Soil borings were advanced to a minimum depth of 18 inches inside the wetland areas, at the borders, and outside, where applicable, to enable an accurate delineation of wetland boundaries. Samples of dominant vegetation were also collected. Wetland boundaries have been marked on the property with sequentially numbered flags that read "Wetland Boundary" or "Wetland Delineation". Wetland boundary locations are shown on Figure 2. Photographs of wetland and upland sample locations are found in Figure 8. Wetland data forms attached to this report further document the findings. 10 7.0 STANDARD OF CARE The opinions presented in this report are based on information collected during the course of this study and represent Earth Science Associates' professional opinion and, as such, are not a guarantee. Earth Science Associates' professional judgment is based on generally accepted practices exercised by professionals currently practicing in this area under similar budget and time constraints. Certain information contained in this report may have been provided by companies, agencies, and/or personal contacts not within Earth Science Associates' employ. Earth Science Associates will make no representation or warranties that such information is accurate or that any independent investigation, beyond the agreed Scope of Services, has been or will be made to verify the accuracy of such information. The material contained in this report is to be considered confidential. Distribution, sale or publication of this report or any part thereof without the express, written consent of Earth Science Associates, Inc., is prohibited. Additional copies of this report may be obtained by contacting Earth Science Associates, Inc., at (651) 674-6210. "`N Prepared/Reviewed by: Kenneth K Meek, CPG, PG President / Hydrogeologist AIPG Certified Professional Geologist W8600 Minn. Professional Geoscientist #30221 1 11 8.0 REFERENCES Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Technical Report Y-87-1). 1987. Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Cowardin, L.M., VL Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1992. Classification of Wetlands and Deepivater Habitats of the United States. (FWS/OBS-79131) U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. Eggers, S.D., and D.M. Reed. 1987. Wetland Plants and Plant Communities of Minnesota and Wisconsin. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St. Paul, Minnesota. Minnesota Audubon Council. 1993. Minnesota Wetlands: A Primer on Their Nature and Function. National Audubon Society, St. Paul, Minnesota. Minnesota Audubon Council. 1994. Protecting Minnesota Wetlands: The Role of the Public. National Audubon Society, St. Paul, Minnesota. Minnesota Audubon Council. 1993. Wetland Regulations in Minnesota. National Audubon Society, St. Paul, Minnesota. Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources. 1993. Minnesota Wetland Delineation Field Guide. Minnesota Association of Soil and Water Conservation Districts, St. Paul, Minnesota. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 1992. Pamphlet: Wetland Types and Definitions. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Division of Waters, St. Paul, Minnesota. Ojakangas, R.W., and C.L. Matsch. 1982. Minnesota's Geology. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Reed, P.B., Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: National Summary. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88(24). Washington, D.C. Soil Survey. 1971. Soil Survey of Carver County, Minnesota. USDA-NRCS. 12 FIGURES k.: e x,acGvipl=- ,114i� - 1 �•:it�taox�4��aaroonm�ca�uyS/ �r r�+tr�a ,r �. A�. � � � i �eSI�AHL y4.iIIJ� prr, � i W L7 �, - "3 pt iy.1ICGY:' ) u4LJMrz=D% 'Ink L ate«, : c g Ffrtrf3oon 17 p i' }1r � cake CETb p1Tb C ts 57 �`�� fa'm`ora`urs L �tOEiDlPiiS fi/Y _ �,F i./seeCs! h - -- _ IL to 74c* OR JL ILADii J g 4 ARlY44:�A1 � Si.CNCOtY Nor II L' tYxtML... 7WO I&%,!LfWxraI � CRptt5llYrJ�t1 IF O � R= Gat MUM IIL"t�EI Ri1CI L! YR t7tt� 4mnW ava.0 f_ 1 $ ►s�ara:AH Y a G — ell am �4 R 7 SITE LOCATION giro r? R 5 CM1 '1 ice` a &&Mu t • r►1ri CHAS 00112 • 41 _ 55317 ~ F �� ti. Yfffi75dJA:XXC:iiTrli11 � � f-^'' -.� � •~0 • � SL• ��.�:4Gs .. � p � ��i � w d� I&CAN=as � 1'RfiY • ?B00 7 14 Ll r L gFRBRcut - rl : r{i/ • �... � .. i, tGioD kFr� Figure 1 Location Map 'Mik , � Figure 3 USGS 7.5" Topographic Map 40 \ t,., ft Figure 5 National Wetlands Inventory Map '^55C i w i y9y � � � f rt, '>� i. 'a d , •.'i 'ay •:y 4c3 £' ? •�:Y i ` -, �- � 'a �" d a _%y calp, • y �'- a`-,ys,� �„s+`.r�� r� _'_,� t • _�'� d . ° `x, Sep �'*'-� -?` � Y -a ;� _..7 -hu ° } ^2s *j *a '.` i'" �• k r�s F � w � a: "Sys 3+a .Si s FiM s ,� .il.= r , � w - � a o 4 s^ti •i a-�.f n :.x' v � • ww .� _ �" - r y` �i � D �; ,�a 1 � •use � � E� . r-i�_:u• rr �' - � s°%_ -. '.�� tip '..� � `�1r3'F` y„. v,... <ca`�it�. :ice. � � r -' NS r re ys tea.; sy�♦ °R a ...�s _ _ NF' J. ra 7-4 .y a•.yj axe a �" °"s y. y�K- sir �f' i' �. � � � r� -�. r,.. .. .N, =# .°fy-�., � • '��.tkvk 7,y�; _ i :-. i y� � r �. = w � .-- rqw' 'r::' . se � �" }�" �s :.� . �.5� � �• _ s .f ��y ]�4'.,- .mod.; �y� i 'gc�a .F,v �.. t-6��j!i .. s y{ � � >+ .• � i a �+►,es }. 0. 1 c` f l< � xxj> Y �u. wrw .�-' � �� d �` A""j r = i �' �,N. § a } i +a+F. ' e X' If z j�� ..ayq"3'�Y'�Yi"'� ,]ay •� � a,4+'; 3, �� k � - el 2,'b i i � -� $k' +'•N Wit° � !� ,�ti y i+� �' o?�. ��. < e.�, ,�rx s `'-^' FIGURE 8 PHOTOGRAPHS w WETLAND KEY (Cowardin et at, 1 979) _ SYSTEM P - PAWSTRINE CLASS RG - LIB - AB - us - ML - Em - ss - Fa - 0W - Rock Lkxmnsol- Aquatic L Moss- Emergent Scrub- Forested Qxn Botu m idated Som= Bed kbted Lichen Shore Staub Mew/ f� Subclass 1 Bedrock 1 Cobble. 1 Algal 1 Cobble - 1 !Moss i Persist 4 Bread - BMW) i Broad - Z Rubble Gravel 2 Aquatic Gravel 2 Lichen 2 Leaved Leaved 2 Send Moss 2 Send sistem Deciduous 006&X us 3 Mud 3 Rooted 3 Mud 2 Needle - 2 Needs - 4 Q garrc . Vascular 4 flrgaric Leaved Leaved 4 Roatirg 5 Vegetated Deciduous Oo6duous Vascular 3 Broad - 3 Broad - 5 Ur*r0mft" Leaved Leaved 6 � 4 Needs 4 Needle Sex lace Leaved Evergreen Leaved EvmVeeri 5 Dead 5 Dead S Dedduom 6 Decktious 7 Ern 7 Evergreen MODIFIERS To more adequatel�T deeavbe end deepvrater 1 Wcex8. one or more of the water re*m. vveter chemistry. sa. or special rtroM=nwybeeppWatthock"orlowi kvelinthatkrmfrY Theta-red-.O%m ma patsobeappliedtotheecobecelsystem. Water ime Wmm pH M=Ww m Sod T.-1-1 rl-m*r&nf fr]lmid for ell A Terr>pt r^, Flooded K Artfr=Py Fboded -1 taypernamte i rtyPcFua=r B Saturated L. SubtWal 2 EuhaFme 8 Eusagm C Seasonally Flooded M kreguiarly 6posed 3 Mixdmfin 9 Mee 0 SeasonaAy Rvoded/ N Regularly Fboded (Bracfash) 0 Fresh We#Drsined P kregularly Flooded 4 Pcl fmRne E Sesser * RbodW *S Ternpa ary - Tidal 5 McWmine Sam * R Seasonal - Tidal 6 06goha ne F Sern wmaner* *T Senvper manent - 0 Fresh Flooded Tidal G,,xtmmAte� SPosed *V Pmn3nemTrdal H Permanently Flooded I U tkgaxnvn J kurmity Flooded K Artftbll Fboded W lntem u tly Flooded/ &Tporaq Y Sat+trams/aerWp manentiS=sonal a Acid 9 t (Srcuntneuwal I n Z Irtemi w y E>lxxed/Permanent ' These water reomes are only used in if dlntrxmm ------ tk lilinf m cW. freshvratta'sys b Beaver d PsrbsLy Uai+ed DWW f Farmed h tleTced! kppaurWed r Artificial Substrate S 5pod x E=avated WETLAND DATA FORMS ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION M A7 COO WPtlandS nPlineatien M2nuan ject/Site: 8470 Galpin Avenue FAApp Date: 5 October 04 licantfOwner: Min er Construction Inc. Coun : Carver Investigator: Earth Science Associates, Inc. ESA#154-904 State: Minnesota Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Is the area a potential Problem Area: Yes No If needed, explain on reverse. Community ID: Transect ID: Plot ID: 1-UPI VEGETATION: _Dominant Plant Species Common Name Scientific Name Stratum Indicator 1. Buckthorn Rhamus cathartica S - FACU 2. Ironwood Ostria ! iniana T FACU- 3, Cocklebur H FACW 4. Rubarb H FACU 5. Basswood, american Trlia americana I T FACU 6. Ash, rick Zenthox lum amarrcanum S FACU+ 7. Oak, white Quercus albs T FACU 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. Percent of Dominant Species (excluding FAC-). that are OBL. FACK or FAC ; 40 Remarks: KYUKULQUY: Wetland Hydrology indicators: Recorded Data (describe in Remarks) Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: _,Aedal Photographs Inundated _Other Saturated in Upper 12 inches _x No Recorded Data Available Water Marks Drift tines Field Observations: Sediment Deposits Depth of Surface Water. Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth to Free Water in Pit: >12" Secondary indicators (2 or more required): Depth to Saturated Soil: >12' Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 in. Water -Stained Leaves Local Soil Survey Data FAC-Neutral Test Other (exolain in Remarks) SOILS - Plot 1D:1 Map Unit Name (Series & Phase): KD- Lester-Killkenny loam, '12-18% Drainage Class: Well Field Observations Taxonomy Confirm Mapped Type? Yes: No Su roa : 0-26' Dark brown I Oyr4/2 sandy loam Profile Description: 26-30' Brown 10yr4/3 fine sandy loam w/ fine gravel, dry Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions De th inches Horizon Munsell Moist Munsell Moist Abundanoe/Contrast Structure etc. Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Redoximorphic Concentrations Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Sons Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WtILAND DETERMINATION: Hydrophytic Vegetation Yes two (Circle) Present? Wetland Hydrology Present: Yes No Hydric Soils Present: Yes NQ 1 Is this Sampling Point Within a Yes tVo (Circle) 0 0 s 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION 1-1 OAT rf%= WMI%ndc nali naa4rnn Mam call Project/Site: 8470 Galpin Avenue Date: 5 October 04 A IicantlOwner: Min er Construction Inc. County: Carver Investigator Earth Science Associates, Inc. ESA#154.904 State: Minnesota Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Is the area a potential Problem Area: Yes No L.jIf needed, explain on reverse. Community ID: Transeet ID: Plot ID: 2 -bdr VFGETOTinm Dominant Plant Species Common Name Scientific Name Stratum Indicator 1. Soybean G ne max H FACU 2. 3. 4. 5, 6, 7. 8. 9. 10. i1. 12, Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAG i 6 (excluding FAG), Remarks,, HYDROLOGY - Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Recorded Data (describe in Remarks) _Stream, lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators, _Aerial Photographs Inundated _Other Saturated in Upper 12 inches _x No Recorded Data Available Water Marks Drift Lines Field Observations: Sediment Deposits Depth of Surface Water, — Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth to Free Water in Pit: >12' Secondary indicators (2 or more required): Depth to Saturated Soil: >12' Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 in. Water. -Stained Leaves x Local Soil Survey Data FAG -Neutral Test Other (exolain in Remarks) area SOILS! Plot ID: 2 Map unit Name (Series & Phase): GL-Glencoe clay loam Drainage Class: Welt . _ Field Observations Taxonomy Confirm Mapped Type? Yes: No (Subgroup): 0-20' Blackt0yf2li organic clay, moist ProfoEe cri tiom Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions Depth inches Horizon Munsell Moist Munseil Moist AbundancelContrast Structure etc. Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Redoximorphic Concentrations Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils. Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions x Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Listed on National Hydric Soils last Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WFTr eNn nr_Tr-mmi IAT1nM- Hydrophytic Vegetation Yes No (Circle) Present? Wetland Hydrology Present Yes No Hydric Soils Present: Y. U No Is this Sampling Point Within a Yes No (Girds) Wetland? Remarks: Drained low area. Non -wetland, does not meet hydric or vegetative criterion ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION 119R7 Cr]I= Wafland-- Dplineatien Manual Pro'ectlSite: 8470 Galpin Avenue Date: 5 October 04 Applicant/Owner: Min er Construction Inc. County: Carver Investigator: Earth Science Associates Inc. ESA#154-904 State: Minnesota Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Is the area a potential Problem Area: Yes No L.Qf needed, explain on reverse. Community ID: Transect ID: Plot I D: 3 -wtl VEGETATInN- Dominant Plant Species Common Name Scientific Name Stratum Indicator 1. Reed Canary Grass Phalarus afanducia G FACW+ 2. Pinkweed (smartweed) Polygonum pensylvanlcum R FACW+, DRA 3. Cattail, broad leafed T ha latifolia G OBL 4. Cotton grass Carex sp. G OBL 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. _ 12. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL. FACW, or FAC (excluding FAG-). Remarks: Center of low-lying area HYDROLOGY: Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Recorded Data (describe in Remarks) `Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: ,,,Aerial Photographs Inundated _Other x Saturated in Upper 12 inches x No Recorded Data Available Water Marks Drift Lines Field Observations: Sediment Deposits Depth of Surface Water. x Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth to Free Water in Pit: 6' Secondary indicators (2 or more required): Depth to Saturated Soil: 6' Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 in. Water -Stained Leaves x Local Soil Survey Data x FAC-Neutral Test Other (explain in Remarks) center of low -Nina area SOILS - Plot ID: 3 Map Unit Name (Series & Phase): GL.Glencoe d—ay loam Drainage Class; Well . --- Field Observations Taxonomy Confirm Mapped Type? Yes: No (Subgroup): 0-20' SlacklOyr+2l1 organic day. wet at 6' Prg_file_Oesaivtion; Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions De th inches Horizon Munsell Moist Munsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structure etc. Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Redoximorphic Concentrations Histic Epipedon..._r High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Suffidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soa1s x Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions x Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Main in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION: Hydrophytic Vegetation Yes No (Circle) Present? Wetland Hydrology Present: Yes No Hydric Soils Present: Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Yes No (Circle) Wetland? Remarks: Center of tiled low area. Tiling has been is place for. reportedly. 40 years plus. ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION 119R7 rnF watiandc ndsunpatien Manuall ProjecUSite; 8470 Galpin Avenue Date: 5 October 04 A licant/Owner: Min er Construction Inc. - Coun : Carver lnvesti ator: Earth Science Associates, Inc. ESA#154-904 State: Minnesota Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Is the area a potential Problem Area: Yes No If needed, explain on reverse. Communit ID: Transect [D: Plot ID: 4 - upl VFGF-TATIAN- Dominant Plant Species Common Name Scientific Name Stratum indicator 1. Claver white 7rifolium re ns H FACU 2. Lambs Quarter ChenopoMtm album H FAG 3. Wheat G FACU- 4. Mint, wild Mentha arvenesis H FACW 5. Thistle Canada Cilsium alvense H FACU 6. Thistle nodding Carduus nutans H UPL T. Ra2yqd Ambroia artemisifolia H FACU 8. Foxtail, meadow Alopeewus pratensis G FACW 9. 10. 11. 12. Percent of Dominant Species (excluding FAG), that are OBL. FACW, or FAC . 40 Remarks: HYDROLOGY - Wetland Hydrology indicators: _ Recorded Data (describe in Remarks) _Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: serial Photographs Inundated Other Saturated in tipper 12 inches _x No Recorded Data Available Water Marks Drift Lines Field Observations: Sediment Deposits Depth of Surface Water. Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth to Free Water in Pit: >12' Secondary indicators (2 or more required): Depth to Saturated Soil: >12' Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 in, Water -Stained Leaves Local Soil Survey Data FAC-Neutral Test Other (e)plain in Remarks) Catchbasin SOILS - Plot ID: 4 Map Unit Name (Series S Phase): CO -Cordova day loam Drainage Class: Poo Field Observations Taxonomy Confirm Mapped Type? Yes: No x .(Subgroup): 0-20' Blackl0yrV1 organic day, dry Profi_iE DBSC Qjjgn: Matra Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions Depth inches Horizon Munsell Moist Munsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structure etc. Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Redoximorphic Concentrations Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions x Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION: Hydrophytic Vegetation Yes N2 Present? Wetland Hydrology Present: Yes No Hydric Soils Present: • Yeg No Is this Sampling Point Within a Yes No (Circle) Wetland? f a ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION 114R7 MF Watrand4t natinaation Manua!] Pfolect/Site: 8470 Galpin Avenue Date: 5 October 04 A li222M2)wner: Min er Construction, Inc. County: Carver Investigator: Earth Science Associates, Inc. ESA#154-904 State: Minnesota Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Is the area a potential Problem Area: Yes No If needed, exolain on reverse. Communi ID: Transect ID: Plot ID: 5-wtl VF{.ETOT10N- Dominant Plant Species Common Name Scientific Name 12. Stratum Indicator I. Reed Cana Grass Phalarusarunduda G FAGW+ Nettle stinging Utbca dioraa H FAC+ 3. Willow, black Salix nigra S OBL, DRA 4. 5. s. 7. s. 9. 10. 11. 12. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL. FACW, or FAC, 0 (excluding FAC-). Remarks: Recorded Data (describe in Remarks) _Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge __,Aerial Photographs ,Other x_ No Recorded Data Available Field Observations: Depth of Surface Water. Depth to Free Water in Pit: >12' Depth to Saturated Soil, >12' band Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: Inundated l Saturated in Upper 12 inches Water Marks Drift Lines Sediment Deposits x Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Secondary indicators (2 or more required): Oxidized Root Channels in tipper 12 in.. Water -Stained Leaves x Local Soil Survey Data x FAG -Neutral Test SOILS - Plot Id: 5 Map Unit Name (Series & Phase), CS-Canistreo silty day foam Drainage Class: Well _ Field Observations Taxonomy Confirm Mapped Type? Yes: No Su rou : 0-20' Blackl0yr2li organic silty day loam Profile Dmdotiom Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions Depth inches Horizon Munsell Moist Munsell Moist AbundanoelContrast Structure etc, Hydric Soil Indicators, Histosol Redoximorphic Concentrations Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions x lasted on Local Hydric Soils List Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks- WFTI Agin nr-TGRMIrJAT1f)M- getation YLe No (Circle) ogy Present: Y—e No FHydndcSob sent: Yes No Is this Sampling Point WRhin a No (Cirde) Wetland? ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION f4027 rnC Waflanrla r1nlinnn4inn Mnnunil ProjectlSite: 8470 Galpin Avenue Date: 5 October 04 A licant/Owner. Min er Construction Inc. County: Carver Investigator: Earth Science Associates, Inc. ESA#154-904 State: Minnesota Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Is the area a potential Problem Area: Yes tLo If needed, explain on reverse. Community ID: I iransect ID: Plot ID: 6-wtl VMr-TATinm. Dominant Plant Species Common Name Scientific Name Stratum Indicator 1. Reed Cana Grass Phalarus arunduda G FACW+ 2- Nettle stinging t/rtica dkka H FAC+ 3. Willow, black Salix nigra S OBL, -DRA 4. Goldenrod grass -leaved Wida raminifolia H FACW 5. Willow. sandbar Salvr exigua S OBI., DRA 6. Pinkweed (smadweed) Polygonum pensylvanicum H FACW+. DRA 7. Cockleburr H FACW 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL. FACW, or FAC , 900 (excluding FAC-). Remarks: HyMni_CX,Y- Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Recorded Data (describe in Remarks) ,Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: ^Aerial Photographs Inundated Other x Saturated in Upper 12 inches ?L No Recorded Data Available Water Marks Drift Unes Field Observations: Sediment Deposits Depth of Surface Water: — x Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth to Free Water in Pit: 2' Secondary indicators (2 or more required): Depth to Saturated Soil: 2' Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 in. x Water -Stained Leaves Local Soil Survey Data x FAC-Neutral Vest Other [exDWn in Remarks} SC]Il A - Plot 10: 6 Map Unit Name (Series & Phase): KB. Lester•KHlkennX loam Drainage Class. Well .. _ Field Observations Taxonomy Confirm Mapped Type? Yes: No (Subgroup): 0-6' Brown 10yr514 fine to med sand Profile Description: 6-20' Blacktf 0yr111 organic silty clay loam i Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions Depth inches Horizon Munsell Moist Munsell Moist) AbundancelContrast Structureetc. Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Redoximorphic Concentrations Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors x Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Listed on National Hydric Soils List Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WFTI amn nFTr-PM1MATV)1J- Hydrophytic Vegetation In No (Circle) Present? Wetland Hydrology Present: Yet No Hydric Soils Present: Yeses No Is this Sampling Point Within a Yes No (Circle) Wetland? Remarks: The north part of this wetland area appears to have been forted by stockpiled soil and the 20•foot high bean along the west property fine, Common Relmional Plants Dominant Plant Species Common Name Scientific Name Stratum Indicator Alder, speckled Alnus incana S FACU Alfatfa bfrdica o sativa F FACU Ash, while Fraxinus americana T FACU Ash, p!Lay Zanthoxylum americanum S FACU+ Aspen, quaking Po ulus tremuloides T FAC Basswood, american Tifia amencana T FACU Birch, paper Betula eWnfere T FACU+ BlackbegX Rubus affe hentensis S FACU+ Blue Grass Kentucky Poa ratensis G FAC- Bluestem, biq 62g222gon erardli G FAC- Brorne Grass Bromus f3pon6cus i G FACU Buckthorn Rhamus cathafta S FACU Cedar, eastern red . nts vi iniana T FACU Cherry, black Prunus seroUna T FACU Cherry, choke. Prunus vi iniana S FAC- Clover, red Tnfolium pmtense H FACU+ Clover, white Tnfolium repens H FACU Club Moss Lyopopodium corn Tatum H FACU+ Corn Zea mays G FACU Dandelion Taraxacum oflickinale G FACU Fescue, meadow Testuca pratensis G FACU Goldenrod, Canada Sofidago canidensis H FACU Grape, northern fox Vitus labruca F FACU Grass, indian SorghasWm nufans G FACU+ Grass uack AgMWon ree2ns G FACU Honeysuckle Lonicera sp. S FACU Ironwood Osttia Virginlana T FACU- Lambs Quarter ChaQQpqMO album H FAC- Maple, sugar Acersuwharum T FACU Maple. red Acerrubtum T FAC Milkweed, Purple Ascleias u urascens H FACU Mullien Verbascum tha sus H FACU Oak, red Querrus nrbra T FACU Oak; white Quercus albs T FACU Plum american Prunus americana S UPL Plum, Canada Prunus n' m S FACU- RaELeed Ambroia artemisifolia H FACU Ras be , Baileys Rubus baile anus S UPL Rubarb H 1 FACU Strawberry, wild Fra aria Wtginiona G FAC- Soybean Ghcine max H FACU Sumac Rhus oo flinum S, T UPL Thistle Canada Cirsium arvense H FACU Thistle nodding Carduus nutans H UPL Witch -hazel Hamemelis vi iniana S FACU Alder, green Alnus Cris e S FAC Ash, black Fraxinus n' ra T FACW+ Ash, green Fraxinus nns lvanfca T FACW Astermarsh Aster simplex H FACW Aster, calico Asterfaterittorus H FACW- ar-ticks, devils Bidens frondosa H FACW Birch, river Betula n' ra T FACW Boxelder Acerne undo T FACW Cedar, northern white Thu a ocddentalis T FACW Cinnamon fem Osmonda cinnamonea H FACW Currant, rick Ribes lacustra S FACW Dewben Rubus h4gois S FACW Elderberry, common Sambucus canensis S FACW- Elm, american Ulmus ameticana T FACW- Foxtail, meadow Alopecurus pratensis G FACW Goldenrod,grass-leaved Solida raminifolla H FACW Meadow Sed a Carex 22nulgfix G FACW+ Mint, wild Mentha arvenesis H FACW Milkweed marsh Ascle ias incamata H FAC+ Nettle, slinging-U►bw dioica H FAC+ Pin Oak Quercus pulustft T FACW Pinkweed smartweed P um ns l a cum H FACW+, DRA Poplar, balsam Po ufus baWmifera T FACW Redosier doqwood Comus stolonifera S FACW Reed Cana Grass Phalarus arunducia G FACW+ Horsetail, smooth E uistem laev' atum G FACW Sensitive fern Onaclea sensibilis H FACW Silky Dogwood Comus amomum S FACW+ Silver Maple Acersuccarinum T FACW Sunflower, sawtooth Helianthus glosseserratus H FACW- Switch Grass Panicum vi atum G FAC+ Timothy, wild Muhlenbe is &Merata G FACW+ Alder, ae2dded Alnus rugusa S OBL Alder, hazel Alnus serrulata S OBL Boneset Eu fordum perfolietum H OBL Bluejoint grass Cala rosSs canadensis G OBL Broad -Leaved Arrowhead Sa ittarie laufolia H OBL Bur -reed Spaiganium Sp. G OBL Bullrush, sp. Scf us SA G OBL Cattail, broad leafed Dpha latifolia G OBL Giant Reed Grass Phrammites australls G OBL Cattail, narrow leafed Typha anqustifolia G OBL Duckweed t emna s p. H OBL Joe - a Weed Eu atorium maculatum H OBL Marsh Milkweed Ascle as incamata H OBL Rush, common Juncos effuses G OSL Sedge, hummock Carex strdcta G OBL Sedge, bottlebrush Carex comosa G OBL Sedge, fox Carex vul fholdea G OBL Sedge. slough Carex atherodes G OBL Sedge, woo Carex lasioca G OBL Willow, sandbar Salix ex' ua S OBL, DRA Willow, black Salix n' m S OBL, DRA Wool Grass Sc us Anus G OBL Swamp Th st% Cirsium muticurn H OBL Water Plantain Alisma plantago OBL 11 Name of Local Government Unit: City of Chanhassen Name of Applicant. Eden Trace Corporation Application Number. 05-23 Type of Application (check one): r Date of Application: July_, 12 2005 ❑ Exemption Decision ❑ No Loss Decision ❑ Wetland Boundary and Type Determination ® Replacement Plan Decision ❑ Banking Plan Decision Location of Project: NE 22 116N 23W '/4 '/4 '/4 Sec. Twp. Range Summary of Project: Applicant proposes to impact .10 acres of Type 2 wetland, and .44 acres of Type 3 wetland for a total of .54 acres of wetland impact for the construction of 8 warehouse/office buildings. Applicant proposes to create .54 acres of wetland to satisfy NWC and provide 1.12 acres of PVC. Applicant has included an addendum describing project alternatives and mitigation plan. You are hereby notified that the above -referenced application was made to the Local Government Unit on the date stated above. Comments on this application will be accepted until July, 29 2005 decision on this matter will be made August_8, 2005 City Counci_l_Meeting . Contact Lori Haak at 952-227-1135 for details or changes to decision- making schedule. AL GOVE NT UNIT IA igOf[ ure Water Resources Coordinator Title List of Addressees: Landowner Eden Trace Corporation 8185 Mallory Court Chanhassen, MN 55305 oS Dad Members of Technical Evaluation Panel Mr. Brad Wozney, Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources Mr. Chip Hentges, Carver Soil and Water Conservation District Watershed District or Watershed Management Organization Mr. Bob Obermeyer, Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District Page 1 of 2 Minger(App I.ess_lOK) 9/16104 Department of Natural Resources Regional Office Ms. Julie Ekman, Area Hydrologist DNR Wetland Coordinator Ecological Services Station 500 Layfayette Road, Box 25 St. Paul, MN 55155 Corp of Engineers Project Manager @ Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District ATTN: CO-R, 190 Fifth Street East St. Paul, MN 55101-1638 A Individual members of the public who requested a copy (none) Page 2 of 2 Minger(App Less_10K) 9/161 4 NA-M662"313 (v.2.01 for MS WORD) 02/14/03 Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Forms for WaterMetland Projects USE THIS APPLICATION FOR ANY PROJECT AFFECTING A LAKE, RIVER, STREAM OR WETLAND, INCLUDING: - Local Government Unit Approval Pursuant to Minnesota Wetlands Conservation Act (WCA) Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Permit to Work in Public Waters Department of the Army Permit (33 CFR 325) Note; The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) will forward application form to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) for processing if state water quality certification is required from the MPCA. You do not need to send this application to the MPCA. This application packet includes: Part I: The BASIC APPLICATION and the COE APPLICATION to be filled out by all applicants (see Instructions). PART II: The REPLACEMENT PLAN SUPPLEMENT to be completed onyjor projects that impact wetlands and require a replacement plan for wetland mitigation. If you're not sure whether your project requires a replacement plan, call your Local Government Unit (LGU) or Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) office for guidance. Do not proceed with your project until you have received all required approvals from your LGU, the DNR and the COE. If you wish to confirm the status of your application at any time, contact the agencies directly (see Instructions, page 2). Proceeding with work before all required authorizations are obtained may result in fines or other penalties, and may include a requirement to restore the project site to original condition. If you have questions or need assistance with filling out these forms, contact your local SWCD office, your LGU, your Area DNR Waters office, or your COE field office (see Instructions, page 2). If you believe that your project may be subject to watershed district, local zoning, or any other local regulations besides those of your LGU, contact those office(s) directly. If you are a Federal Farm Program participant and your project affects a wetland or water body on agricultural land, your eligibility for USDA benefits may be affected. Contact a Natural Resources Conservation Service office for further information. A QUICK LOOK AT THE PROJECT APPLICATION PROCESS Electronic files: Forme can be downloaded and filled out using Microsoft Word. Your input will be restricted to fill-in fields where users can enter text or check boxes. 'These areas appear gray on the screen, but not on the printed document. Send copies of these completed application forms to your L(3U, your Area DNR Waters office, and your COE regulatory office. Any of the agencies may make initial contact with you to: a) inform you that it has no jurisdiction over your project; b) request additional information needed; or e) inform you of applicable foes. . When your application is considered complete and appropriate fees have been received (if requested) it will be distributed for appropriate review. Following agencies' reviews, you will be informed if it has been approved, approved with changes or conditions, withdrawn, or denied. For information about state laws, rules and regulations that direct this process go to the web site www.revisor.leg.statc.mn.us. For information on. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regulations go to the web site www.mvp.usacemmy mil. instructions for Part I HELPI: Every applicant must. fill out Section I. The applicant is the person, agency, company, corporation, or other organization that owns, leases, or holds other legal rights to the land where the project is located. Indicate names of multiple applicants on a separate sheet. HELP 1A: Fill out Section IA only if you have designated an authorized agent. An authorized agent maybe an attorney, builder, consultant, contractor, engineer, or any other person or organization designated by the applicant to represent himther in this process. An agent is not required. HELP 5: Purpose, description and dimensions of project: State briefly (in a sentence or two) what you propose to do and why it is needed. Also, describe whether your project will involve any of the following: _ Construction of structures, filling, draining, dewatering, removing, excavating or repair. - Construction of an access path, bridge, culvert, dam, ditch, dock, driveway, riprap, road, sand blanket, shore protection, or tile line. Construction of any structures on fill, piles or a float -supported platform, If so, describe. - Dredging or discharging (placing fill material) into a -wetland or other water body (including the temporary placement of material). If so, explain the specific purpose of the placement of the material (such as erosion control) and indicate how it will be done (such as with a backhoe or dragline)..If dredged material is to be discharged on an upland site, identify the location of the site. Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Forms for Water/Wetland Projects instructions, Page 1 Include an overhead view drawing showing the work to be undertaken and its relative location on the property. Show items such as property boundaries or lot dimensions; location and extent of shoreline, wetlands and water; location and dimensions and footprint of the proposed project, structure or activity (include length, width, elevation and other measurements as appropriate); points of reference such as existing homes, structures, docks or landscape features; indication of north; and location of spoil and disposal sites (if applicable). Hand drawn, computer generated or professionally prepared drawings are acceptable, as long as they contain all necessary information clearly, accurately, and in adequate detail. Please include specific dimensions whenever possible. You may also include photos, if you wish. HELP 7: For information regarding adjacent landowners, contact the tax assessor where the project is to be developed. HELP 8: If any part of the work has already been completed, describe the area already developed. Include a description of structures completed; any dredged or till material already discharged (including type of material and volume in cubic yards); aces or square feet filled (if a wetland or other waterbody); and whether the work was done under an existing permit (if so identify the authorization, if possible). HELP 9: Other permits, reviews or approval related to the project may include the following: conditional use permit; plat approval; zoning variance; National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit; state disposal system permit (includes dredged material disposal); watershed district/watershed management organization permit (stormwater, erosion, floodplain); environmental assessment workshect/environmental impact statement; hazardous waste site; feedlot permit; groundwater appropriation permit; or county/township driveway/road permit. Are you aware of any archeological or cultural resource deterrinations or surveys completed concerning the project or replacement site by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) or others? If yes, please explain on a separate sheet or attach a copy of any determinations or surveys. Final Checklists (Part 1) ❑ Have you completed all of Part I (Page 1), plus the Federal application (Page 2)? ❑ Did you (and your agent, If applicable) sign Section 10 on page I? ❑ Have you signed the Application for the Department of the Army Permit (Page 2) to seek Federal authorization of your project? ❑ Have you included the necessary attachments for Part I? Attachments must include: ❑ Site Locator Map (Section 3) ❑ Type of Project (Section 4) (if additional space was needed) ❑ Overhead View of Project (Section 5 and HELP 5) ❑ Project Purpose, Description and Dimensions (Section 5) (if additional space was needed) Attachments may also include: ❑ Applicant Contact Information (HELP 1) (if additional space was needed) ❑ Project Location (Section 3) (if additional space was needed) ❑ Project Alternatives (Section 6) (if additional space was needed) ❑ Photo`graphs ❑ Adjoining Property Owners (Section 7) (if additional space was needed) ❑ Work Already Completed Section (Section 8) (if you answered YES) ❑ State Historic Preservation Office determination or survey Submitting Your Application Make three copies of the entire application and all attachments. Keep the original, and mail a complete copy of your application to each of the local, state, and Federal entities listed below. Be sure to include Part I and all attachments with each application. LOCAL: Send to the appropriate Local Goverment Unit (LGU). If necessary, contact. your county Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) office or visit the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) web site (www.bwsr.state.mn.us) to determine the appropriate LGU. STATE: Send to your Area DNR Waters office, attention Area hydrologist. if necessary, contact your, county Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) office or visit the DNR website (www.dnr.state.mn.us) to locate the Area Hydrologist for your location, or contact a Regional DNR office: NW Region: NE Region: Central Region: Southern Region: 2115 Birchmont Beach Road N.E, 1201 East Highway 2 1200 Warner Road 261 Highway IS South Bemidji, MN 56601 Grand Rapids, MN 55744 St. Paul, MN 55106 New Ulm, MN 56073 Phone: 218-755-3973 Phone: 218.327.4416 Phone: 651-772-7910 Phone: 507 359-6053 FEDERAL: Send to the appropriate U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regulatory field office: Brainerd: St. Paul: La Crescent; Two Harbors: U.S. COE, Regulatory Branch U.S. COE, Regulatory Branch U.S. COE, Regulatory Branch U.S. COE, Regulatory Branch 10867 E. Gull Lake Drive N.W. Army Corps of Engineers Centre 1114 South Oak Street 1554 Highway 2, Suite 2 Brainerd, MN 56401-9051 I90 51s Street East La Crescent, MN 55947-1338 Two Harbors, MN 55161 Phone: 218-829-8402 St. Paul, MN 55101-9051 Phone: 507-895-8059 Phone: 218-834-6630 Phone: 651-290-5375 WEB SITES: BWSR: www.bwsr.state.mn.us US. ALOE: www.mvp.usacM=y.n0 DNR: www.dnr.state.mn.us MPCA: wwwpaa.state.mn.us Minnesota local/State/Federal Application Ferns for WateflWetland Projects Instructions, Page 2 Instructions For Part 11 Complete those portions of Part 1l: Replacement PIan Supplement for which information is readily available (such as location, existing land use, size of impact area, etc.) A person certified in wetland delineation must determine items pertaining to specific wetland impacts (wetland type, predominant vegetation, watershed name, etc.) Contact the local soil and water conservation district (SWCD) office for further information on obtaining such items. What to Include on Plans Detailed overhead views of replacement site(s) (Part 11), as well as profile view(s) of replacement site(s) (Part II), may be either hand drawn, computer generated or professionally prepared, as long as they contain all necessary information clearly, accurately, and in adequate detail. Please include specific dimensions whenever possible. You may also include photos, if you wish. Overhead views of Part 11 replacement site(s) should include the following items that pertain to your project: Property boundaries and/or lot dimensions. - Location and extent of shoreline, wetlands and water. Location and dimensions of proposed project, structure or activity. Include length, width, elevation and other measurements as appropriate. Points of reference. (such as existing homes, structures, docks or landscape features). Location of inlet and outlet structures. Indication of north. Location of spoil and disposal sites (if applicable). Areas of wetland and upland plants established. Profile views (side or cross -sectional views) should include the following items that pertain to your project: Location and dimensions of proposed project, structure or activity. Include elevation, depth, soil profile, side .slope and other measurements as appropriate. Proposed water level elevation. Final Checklists Part I[: Replacement Plan Supplement ❑ Have you completed all of Part II (pages 3-5)? ❑ Did you (or your agent) sign Section 19 on page 5? ❑ Have you Included the necessary attachments for Part 11? Attachments must include: ❑ If the project includes any wetland banking (complete or partial), include Application for Withdrawal of Wetland Credits Form (Section 14) ❑ If the project Includes any prof ect-specific replacements (complete or partial), include: Description of Replacement Wetlands) Construction (Section IS) Copy of vegetation management plan (Section IS) Scale drawing of overhead view or replacement wetland (Section 18) Scale drawing of profile view of replacement wetland (Section IS) Attachments may also include: ❑ Additional description of Wetland impact Charts (Section 11) (if additional space was needed) ❑ Additional Description of Replacement Wetlands charts (Section 17) (if additional space was needed) ❑ Additional soils information for created replacement wetland(s) (Section 18) (if available) Note: To deposit surplus wetland credits in the State Wetland Bank, submit a Wetland Banking Application directly to your LGU (Section 16). Preparing Your Application for Mailing ❑ To apply for both state and Federal authorization, your application must Include Part I (Page 1), the Federal application (Page 2), and attachments as. indicated on Final Checklist forPart I(Instructions, Page 2). ❑ Your application must also Include Part H (Pages 3-5) and additional attachments as indicated on Final Checklist for Part II (above). ❑ Make three copies of the entire application and all attachments. Keep the original, and mail the three copies to the appropriate local, state, and Federal agencies (see Instructions for Part 1 for addresses). Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Fomu for WaterlWetland Projects Instructions Page 3 ;NA-026620-030 (V.2.01 forNISWORD) 02114103 Minnesota Local/State/Federal A2plication Form for WaterMetland Projects For internal Use Only Field Office Code Date PART I: BASIC APPLICATION "See N$LF' directs you to important additional inrormation and assistance in Instructions, Page A. I. LANDOWNEIUAPPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION (See Help I) Name: Eden Trace Corporation Phone: 612.361.0722 Complete mailing address: 8156 Mallory Court, Chanhassen, MN 55305 IA. AUTHORIZED AGENT (See Help 1A) (Only if applicable; an agent is not required) Name: Schoell & Madson. Inc. Phone: 952.546.7601 Complete mailing address: 10580 Wayzata Boulevard. Suite 1, Minneapolis. MN 55305 2. NAAM TYPE AND SIZE OF PUBLIC WATERS or WETLANDS IMPACTED (Attach Additional Project Area sheets if needed) Name or I.D. # of Waters Impacted (if applicable; if known): (Check all that apply): ❑Lake ❑ rover ® Wetland type ❑ 1 ❑ I L 0 z ® 3 04 ❑ 5 ❑ 6 ❑ 7 ❑ 8 Indicate size of entire lake or wetland (check one): ® Less than 10 acres (indicate size: f' 5q) ❑10 to 40 acres ❑ Greater than 40 acres 3. PROJECT LOCATION (Information can be found on property tax statement, property title or title insurance): Project street address: Gaipin Blvd & Lyman Blvd Fire #: City (if applicable): Chanhassen '/. Section: Section: Township #: Range #: County: Lot #: Block: Subdivision: Watershed (name or #) Attach a simple site locator map. If needed, include on the map written directions to the site from a known location or landmark, and provide distances from known locations. Label the sheet SITE LOCATOR AfAP. 4. T YPE OF PROJECT: Describe the type of proposed work. Attach TYPE OFPROJECT sheet if needed. The site is to be developed as an office park with eight single story buildings. S. PROJECT PURPOSE, DESCRIPTION AND DIMENSIONS: Describe what you plan to do and why it is needed, how you plan to construct the project with dimensions (length, width, depth), area of impact, and when you propose to construct the project. This Is the most important part ofyour application. See HELPS before completing this section; see What To Include on Plans (Instructions, page 1). Attach PROJECT DESCRIPTION sheet. See attached addendum. Footprint of project: 0,5tf acres or square feet drained, filled or excavated. 6. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES: What alternatives to this proposed project have you considered that would avoid or minimize impacts to wetlands or waters? List at least TWO additional alternatives to your project in Section 5 that avoid wetlands (one of which may be "no build" or "do nothing"), and explain why you chose to pursue the option described in this application over these alternatives. Attach PROJECT ALTERNATIYES sheet if needed. See attached addendum. 7. ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS: For projects that impact more than 10,000 square feet of water or wetlands, list the complete mailing addresses of adjacent property owners on an attached separate sheet. (See HELP 7) S. PORTION OF WORK COMPLETED: Is any portion of the work in wetland or water areas already completed? ❑ Yes ®No. If yes, describe the completed work on a separate sheet of paper labeled WORK ALREADY COMPLETED. (See HELP 8) 9. STATUS OF OTHER APPROVALS: List any other permits, reviews or approvals related to this proposed project that are either pending or have already been approved or denied on a separate attached sheet. See HELP 9. 10. I am applying for state and local authorization to conduct the work described in this application. I am familiar with the information contained in this application. To the best of my knowledge and belief, all information in Part I is true, complete, and accurate. I possess the rity to undertake the work described, or I am acting as the duly authorized agent of the applicant. Signature ofap (Landotvn ) Da[e Signature ofagent(ifapprca le Date is t 'ibis block must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity sad has the necessary property rights to do so. Itonly the Agent has signed. please attach a separate sheet signed by the landowner, givingnecessmy authorization to the Agent. Minnesota LocallStatctFedcral Appli=fon For= for WaterAVetl=d Projects OF THE ARMY PERIMIT (33 CFR 0-003 Exnires Dec 31. 2004 The public bu*n for this collection of information is estimated to avenge I0 hours per rye, although the majority of applicuions should require S hours or kss: This includes the time for reviewing instructions. Ruching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send conmxnts regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of infomntim including suggestions for reducing this bw dm to Depuortemt of Defcnsr. Washington Headquarters Serviu Directorate of lnformation operations snd Reports, I21 S Jefferson Davis highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 222024302; and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0710-0003) Washington, DC 20S03. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provW= of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for fading to eonly with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control member. Please DO NOT REPJRN your form to either of these addresses. Completed apptiations must bo submitted to the District ecgincer having jurisdiction over the location of tht: proposed activity. PRIVACY ACT STATB;NIEN" : AsIIhori : Rivers and Harbors AmSection 10. 33 t2C 4W-. Clean Wata Ate, Sotion 404.33 USC 1344; Marine Protation, Research and Sanctuarks AM 33 USC 1413. Station 1 o3. Principal purposa- Information provided on this form will be used in evaluating the application for a perniL Rourbx uses; This information may bur shared with the DeTuw=t of Justice and other Federal, state, and kuai government sgenciex Submission of requested information is vohmuw. bowcwr, if information is not provided. the perwit a limbo" eannot be evaluated nor an a pervit be issued ITEMS 1 THROUGH 4 TO BE FMLED IN BY THE CORPS 1. APPLICATION NO. 12. FIELD OFFICE CODE 13. DATE RECEIVED 14. DATE APPLICATION COMPLETED YOU DO NOT NEED TO COMPLETE ITEMS 6-10 and 12-25 in the SHADED AREAS. All applicants must complete non -shaded items 5 and 26. If an agent is used, also complete items 8 and 11. This optional Federal forth is valid • for use only when included as part of this entire state application packet S. APPLICANT'S NAIv1E I S. AUTHORIZED AGENT'S NAME AND TITLE (an agent is not required) Eden Trace Corporation Sc11oell & Madson, Inc. 1 I. STATE MEIV"T OF AUTHORIZATION (if applicable; complete only if duthorWng an agent) I hereby authorize Schoell & Madson, Inc, to act on my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to furnish, 26. Application is hereby [Wade for a pemut or pernvts to authorize the work described in this application. I certify that the information in this application is complete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein or am acting as the duly authorized agent of the applicant. aoOS4— F 1 4 "=84 ZA- '7 Q—aSp appi Sign of agent ;Date The application must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant), or it may be sighed by a duly authorized agent if the statement in Block I I has been filled out and signed. 18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction ofany department or agency of the United States knowingly and willfully falsifies, eoaceals, or covers up with any trick, scheme, or disguises a material fact or mattes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations or makes or cues any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or entry, shall be fined not rnore than S10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both, ENG FORM 4345, Jul 97 EDITION OF FEB 94 IS OBSOLETE. (Proponent: CECW OR) Minnesota Local/State!!"ederal Application Forms for WaterlWedand Projects Page 2 PART li: REPLACEMENT PLAN SUPPLEMENT ,For assistance in completing Part If. contact)vurLocal Government Unit or a professional consultant 11. DESCRIPTION OF WETLAND IMPACTS: Complete the chart below. 1) Use one row of boxes for each wetland impact; 2) If your project has more than one wetland impact, reference your overhead view (part of Section 5) to this chart by identifying and labeling "first impact" and "second impact" on your overhead view; 3) If you are identifying only one wetland type within a given wetland impact area, use the first dotted line and leave the others blank; 4) If you have chosen to identify more than one wetland type within a given wetland impact area, use the extra dotted lines to indicate each wetland type, and identify predominant vegetation and size of impacted area for each separate wetland type within that Impact area; 5) if you do not have access to some of this information, call your LGU or SWCD office for assistance. (Photocopy chart for more impacu; if needed) DESCRIPTION OF WETLAND IMPACTS Wetland impact (as noted on overhead view) Watershed name or number (if known) County, Section, Township, Range Wetland types Predominant vegetation in impacted wetland area Size of area impacted (in acres or square feet) Existing land use in project area (check all that apply) Bluff Creek Type 2 0.10 ❑ Housing ❑ Commercial First................... .................................. ❑ Industrial impact ❑ Parks/recreation areas ❑ Highways and ................................................. associated rights -of -way ❑ Forested ❑ Farmsteadstagricultural ❑ Vacant lands ❑ Public and semi-public Bluff Creek Type 3 t) 44 (schoolslgov't facilities) Second ❑ Airports impact ................... ...._........_......._...,....... ❑ Extractive (gravel pitslquarries) ❑ Other: 'If you are identifying only one wetland type within a given wetland impact area, use the first dotted line and leave the others blank. If you have chosen to identify more than one wetland type within a given wetland impact area, use the extra dotted lines to indicate each separate wetland type, and identify predominant vegetation and size of impacted area for each separate wetland type with that impact area. TOTALS OF AREA(S) IMPACTED FOR EACH WETLAND TYPE ON CHART (indicate acres ® orsquarefeet ❑) Type: 1; IL 2: 4LQ 3: 4 4: 5: b: 7: S. R: 12. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Are you aware of any special considerations that apply to either the impact site(s) or the mplacement.site(s)? ❑ Yes 0 No (Examples: the presence of endangered species, special fish and wildlife resources, sensitive surface waters, or waste disposal site.) If YES, lest and describe briefly. I3. SHORELAND IMPACT ZONE; Please identify each wetland impact site noted in Section 15 that is within 1000 feet of a lake or 300 feet of a river. This site does not lie within a shoreland impact zone. Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Forms for Water/Wetland Projects Page 3 14. HOW PROPOSED REPLACEMENT WILL BE ACCOMPLISHED: Indicate how proposed replacement will be accomplished (check only one box below and continue as indicated): © A. Wetland banking only Complete Application for Withdrawal of Wetland Credits Form and include with your application. Copies of this form are available from your LGU, or download a copy from www.bwsrstate-mn.us Skip to Section 19, page 6 (You do not need to complete Sections 15-18). ® B. Project-specificreplacemnent only Continue with Section 15 below. ❑ C. A Combination of wetland banking and project -specific replacement Complete Application for Withdrawal of Wetland Credits Form and include with your application. Copies of this form are available from your LGU, or download a copy from www.bwsr.state,mn,us Continue with Section 15 below. 15. DESCRIPTION OF REPLACEMENT WE'I'LAND(S) CONSTRUCTION (Complete this section only if you marked Box B or Box C in Section 14 above): Describe in detail how replacement wetland(s) will be. constructed. If several methods will be used, describe each method. Details should include the following: 1) type of construction (such as excavated in upland, restored by tile break, restored by ditch block or revegetatcd); 2) type, size and specifications of outlet structures; 3) elevations relative to Mean Sea Level or established benchmarks or key features (such as sill, emergency overflow or structure height); 4) whatbest management practices will be implemented to prevent erosions or site degradation; 5) proposed timetable for starting and ending the project; and 6) a vegetation management plan. Write this description on a separate sheet of paper labeled DESCRIPTION 0FREPL4CEMW WE7UND CONSTRUCTION. See addendum 16. SURPLUS WETLAND CREDITS: If using project -specific replacement (Box B or Box C in Section 14 above), will the replacement result in any surplus wetland credits that you wish to have deposited in the State Wetland Bank for future use? 0 Yes ®No. If yes, submit a Wetland Banking Application directly to your LGU. Copies are available from your LGU, or download a copy from www.bMstate.srm us 17. DESCRIPTION OF REPLACEMENT WETLANDS: Complete the chart below:1) Use one row of boxes for each wetland replacement site; 2) If your proj ect has more that one wetland replacement site, reference your overhead view (part of Section 5) to this chart by identifying and labeling "first replacement site" and "second replacement site' on your overhead view; 3) If you are identifying only one wetland type within a given replacement site, use the first dotted line(s) and leave the others blank; 4) If you have chosen to identify more than one wetland type in a given replacement site, use the extra dotted I ines to indicate each separate wetland type, and identify type(s) of replacement credits and "restored or created" for each separate wetiand type with that replacement site; 5) If you do not have access to some of the infornation, or if you do not know your replacement ratio, call your LGU or SWCD office for assistance. Photocopy chart formore wetland replacements, if needed) r]l"SC'.RIPTION f]F REPLACEMENT WETLANDS Identify Watershed County Section, Wetland Type(s) of replacement credits Restored Wetland name or Township, TYPOI (in acres or square feet) or replacement number created? site (if known) Range New Wetland Public Value Indicate (as noted on Credits (NWC) Credits (PVC) R or C overhead view) Name of Bluff Creek Carver Type 3 0.54 C First........................................................... ..._ ........... replacement site......... .................... ..................... ..._----.. Name of Bluff Creek Carver Storm 1.12 C Second........... ........................................................... replacement site........ ................... ......-----.......... ..--..._.. 'Circular 39 wetiand types: Indieatel, IL, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, R, or U. If you are fl,54 1.12 identifying only one wetland type within a given wetland impact area, use the first TOTAL NWC TOTAL PVC dotted line and leave the others blank. If you have chosen to identify more than one wetland type within a given wetland impact area, use the extra dotted lines to indicate REQUIRED REPLACEMENT RATIO: each.separate wetland type, and identify predominant vegetation and size of impacted (IJ knOtivn) 2:1 area for each separate wetiand type within that impact area. Mirmesota Local/State/Federal Application Forru for Water/Wetland Projects Page 4 18. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR PROJECT -SPECIFIC REPLACEMENT (Required only if you marked Box B or Box C in Section 14). For projects Involving at least some project -specific replacement, include the following additional information: ® Two drawings to scale of the replacement wetland. Include both overhead view and profile (side view or cross -sectional view). See What to lndude on Plans (Instructions, Page 3) for a detailed description of what should be included in these drawings. Without drawings, your application will be considered incomplete. ❑ For created replacement wetlands, include additional soils information (if available) that indicates the capability of the site to produce and maintain wetland characteristics. Note I: For replacement wetlands located on pipeline easements, you need to receive endorsement of your project from both the easement holder and the Minnesota Department of Public Safety's Office of Pipeline Safety. Before start of construction, the owner of any utilities must be notified. The landowner or contractor is responsible for givingthis notice by calling "Gopher State One -Call" at 652-454-M (Twin Cities Metro Area) or k-SW-2524166 (all other locations). Note 2: For extensive or complex projects supplementary information may be requested at a later dated from one or more of the responding agencies. Such information may include (but not be limited to) the following: topographic map, water table map, soil borings, depth soundings, aerial photographs, environmental assessment and/or engineering reports. 19. SIGNED AFFMIATION: FOR PROJECTS INVOLVING REPLACEMEN-r BY NVL-MAND BANKING ONLY. To the best of my knowledge and belief, all information in Part lI is true, complete and accurate; and I affirm that the wetland losses will be replaced via withdrawal from an account in the State Wetland Bank. FOR PROJECTS ILWOLVING EITHER PROJECT -SPECIFIC REPLACEMENT ONLY OR A COMBINATION OF NVETLAND BANKING AND PROJECTSPECIFIC REPLACEMENT: PartA: The replacement wetland. I affirm that the replacement wetland was not: Previously restored or created under a prior approved replacement plan or permit; AND [rained or filled under an exemption during the previous 10 years; AND Restored with financial assistance from public conservation programs; AND Restored using private funds, other than landowner funds, unless the funds one paid back with interest to the individual or organization that funded the restoration; and the individual or organization notifies the local government unit in writing that the restored weQud may be considered for replacement. Part B: Additional assurances (check all that apply): ® The wetland will be replaced before or concurrent with the actual draining or filling of a w:tlart& ❑ An irrevocable bank letter of credit, performance band. or other acceptable security has been provided to guarantee successful completion of the wetland replacement. ❑ The wetland losses will be replaced via withdrawal from an account in the State Wetland Bank. PartC. For projects involving any project -specific replacement: Within 30 days of either receiving approval of this application orbeginning work on the project, I will record the Declaration of Restriction and Covenants on the deed for the property on wbich the replacement wetlands) will be located; and I will at the same time submit proof of such recording to the LGU. To the best of my knowledge and belief, all information in Part II is true, complete and accurate, and I affirm all statements in Part A and C. as well as chec assurance(s) in Part B. � x Signature or ap t or agenig Date FOR LGU USE ONLY Replacement plan is (check one): ❑ Approved ❑Approved with conditions (conditions attached) LGU official signature. Date ❑ Denied LGU has receive evidence of title and proof of recording of Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland: County where recorded Date Document # assigned by recorder LGU orcial signature Date. Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Forms for Water/Wettand Projects Page 5 Table of Contents Sequencing Discussion -- Project Alternatives..........................................................2 Proposed Mitigation -Wetland Construction ............................................... .......2 ExistingConditions.............................................................................................2 New Wetland Creation.......................................................................................2 Generalized Schedule........................................................................................3 SiteGrading and Soils.......................................................................................3 Vegetation Management....................................................................................3 UplandBuffer................................................................................ ...3 MonitoringPlan..................................................................................................4 Summary of Impact and Mitigation Areas..................................................................4 EQ E C[NG D.1$C.USSt 3N� R Q.1ECN` aERNA3 IV S The Eden Trace Corporation is proposing to build eight warehouse/office buildings in its Chanhassen West Business Park project. The project will develop a majority of the site, but care was taken to ensure that the impact to existing wetlands would be low. The delineation identified six wetlands on site, four of which will be impacted. Impact area A has been determined to be an incidental wetland and therefore will not need to be mitigated. The remaining wetlands (Impact areas B, C & D) total 0.54 acres, and will be mitigated on site by expanding the large existing wetland in the southwest corner of the site. All impacts could be avoided with the no build option, but this was not considered a feasible alternative, as it would meet neither the objective of the owner or developer. The proposed site layout was designed to avoid impacts to the majority of wetland area on site, and it succeeds in doing this; nearly 3.5 acres will be preserved. The largest wetland that will be affected is impact area B, and since the proposed grading plan calls for at most 6' of fill in the impact area, its inclusion in the project is critical. Due to its elevation and location, preserving this wetland would have significantly reduced the developable land on site, and likely reduced the green space and number of trees preserved. The developer has designated that Outlot C. in the north part of the site will. become a park area and will remain in its current state, preserving the many large diameter trees that are currently in place there. This park area would likely have been developed had impact area B been preserved. The proposed mitigation area will expand the southwest wetland along its edges and will also include a stormwater detention pond immediately to the east of this wetland, which will discharge runoff from the site to the wetland. Not only does this configuration make good use of the available land, the area should be conducive to wetland restoration due to its close proximity to the existing wetland. � OP4SED MI 1G. 'tCOft: :::E�'1•I.A . d aC�Ns °RU"C;T` aN EXISTING CONOMONS The mitigation area is proposed to be contiguous with the wetland located southwesterly on the property. This is a large Type 1 wetland with an area of type 3 towards the center. It appears that soils have been deposited in various locations throughout the wetland basin. NEW WETLAND CREATION In an effort to assure that wetland mitigation and restoration follows current science, this plan has been developed relying on the guidelines described in Guidelines For Restoring & Managing Wetland Vegetation by Robert L. Jacobson. 7 GENERALIZED SCHEDULE 1. Fall of 2005 — Grade area 2. Fall of 2005 — Plant Temporary seed mixture WTI 3. Mid to late April, 2006 — Spot treatment of area. 4. Mid to late May, 2006— Plant permanent seed mixture MnDOT/BWSRMixture W2. 5. August to September, 2006 -Mow 6. Summer to fall of 2007 T- Mow area minimum of two times. All wetland mitigation areas shall be designed so that the bottom surface of the mitigation area undulates and has an irregular shape. Further, soils shall be suitable for wetland creation. If suitable soils do not exist at the mitigation area, they shall be brought to the mitigation area and deposited so that the surface is covered with a minimum of 3-tenths of one foot of hydric or otherwise suitable soils. When this is necessary, a hold down shall be excavated so that the finished elevation matches that in on the grading plan for wetland mitigation. Soils shall be free of a seed source for reed canary grass and other invasive or exotic species to the greatest extent feasible. The areas shall be vegetated with a suitable seed mix, as specified on the plans and in this discussion and a monitoring plan shall be developed and implemented. Hydrology shall be supplied to the mitigation area to ensure the success of the mitigation. Where storm water is being used to supply the hydrology, water shall be treated to NURP standards. All erosion control shall follow that described in the SWPP plan. SITE GRADING AND SOILS The elevation at the boundary of the existing wetland, where it will match with the mitigation area, decreases from approximately 945 feet in the northeast to approximately 941 feet in the southeast and northwest corners. The mitigation area will be graded so that the perimeter of the mitigation will generally decrease in elevation towards the existing wetland. The developer did not have a geotechnical report performed as of this permit application so the exact soil composition could not be determined, but based on the NRCS soil map, the site contains typically very poorly drained soils. Suitable soils will need to be brought on site if none are present. VEGETA77ON MANAGEMENT Any soils used within the mitigation areas shall be free of a seed source for reed canary grass or any other invasive/exotic species. Efforts will be taken, where feasible to do so, to control any invasive plants existing in the vicinity of the mitigation areas. MnDOTBWSR seed mixture W2 is to be planted in the mitigation areas. UPLAND BUFFER A permanent buffer will be established around all newly created and restored wetlands on the property. The wetland buffers shall be a minimum of 16.5 feet wide. Minnesota Rules specify that buffer areas may be claimed for PVC. These areas must be adjacent to newly created wetlands and may not exceed the area of the newly created wetlands. After the site has been prepared, an appropriate seed mixture will be used. We propose to use Seed Mixture US as described in the cooperative publication from the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the Minnesota Board of Soil and Water Resources. 3 r �s MONITORING PLAN The mitigation areas will be monitored for five years or until the LGU and TEP determines the mitigation to be effective. Each mitigation area will be visited by a qualified wetland professional, as selected by the applicant, and a report, in the form of a written letter summarizing the findings will be submitted to the LGU at least annually. This report shall, at a minimum, include a description of the observed soils within the mitigation area, a description of the vegetation within the mitigation area — this description shall include percent cover by layer and facultative classification, and a description of hydrology in regard to both primary and secondary indicators. In addition, a map depicting the location of the mitigation areas and the vegetative communities within each mitigation area shall accompany the report. Also to be included with the monitoring report are color photographs of each mitigation area. IMPACTS MITIGATION ID AREA in SF ID AREA in SF Wetland 2 5,117.7 MI C 11,376.3 Upland Buffers 3,506.0 TOTAL 14,882.3 + Note: the excess mitigation is not intended for wetland banking FA Google Maps - chanhassen, mn 5 iT IF LO(JkToX PU GO'" Google Maps ._ chanhassen, mn Maps L 9 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Page 1 of 1 httpJ/maps.google.cona/maps?q=chanhassen,+mn&11=44.855047; 93.586221 &spn=0.02184... 7/8/2005 IMPACTED WETLAND AREAS ® Incidental © 0.44 cc © 0.07 cc DO 0.03 cc TOTAL 0.54 cc REQUIRED MITIGATION AREA 0.54ccx2a 1.08cc PROPOSED WETLAND AREAS NEW WETLAND (E 0.54 cc CREDITS (MITI(,ATION) PUBLIC VALUE rrl 1,12 cc CREDITS (PONDS) �J TOTAL. 1.66 cc IMPACTED WETLAND ® PROPOSED WETLAND LAW Z In00f �f+.r.. raS w•44 w'f .,y it ./ n.Y. A � . KliS r �W PM3•} �.-+r.+.,.+..r...n.w.r...w. .,......+...�..�..•u...." " er Srhoell & ..Y . EDEN TRACE CORP. C""oasaa wsa B"bess tart Fsf w�.�NMIMSw�16.sr »�y„� --- (i.ww QT-. .4T m" y�ufp j _ Sw i..wq • p�ro.�.�+r s.r.�.. ��""' $156 YALLORY C011ii7 CHANHASSEN. UN E5305 G1W.Li.A� '• Wouand Yetlyatton Ma � is 13 ,fx �- .....�»...._�,...�. Schoel[ & Madson, Inc. _16Er+..ft • S.,,.,V . vW � o�+�•aa�s+a-xa-r.c�ana+a-aoas OSI srta sewt uw, sw o0 e¢war.Lr.r.w ss�o-oo p arw oast aaona -r.r ca�3 s+s oocs Project N=e/Locatiorx Wetland Mitigation Chanhassen West Business Park sent Name: Eden Trace Corp. July 8, 2005 60 SCALE SMI PROJECT # 62641-047 oil ......................................... . SCALE: HORIZ: 1 "=50' • VERT: 1 "=5' 960 PROPOSED SURFACE ; .. ...................... 950: ... .... :................ PROPOSED' WETLAND AREA ' EXISTING EXISTING GROUiVD WETLAND AREA 940 c ........ .... .. ....... ........ q DATUM ELEV ' 930.00 00 N In Y-• 0 LO Cr) co 0 0 0 rn cD 6 6 r- O O O m 0) 0+00 0+50 1 +00 1 +50 2+00 o� k r • �x s a � NEWDOC .ti PRELI VIllMARY PLANS FOR: CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS PARK CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA PREPARED FOR: r x EDEN ■ ■ ACE CORP. e TREE PRESERVATION, SITE, STREET, GRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL, SANITARY SEWER, WATERMAIN, STORM SEWER, WETLAND MITIGATION AND LANDSCAPE ,r. e »s coMAtrot sm" �L Pueuc wt es rot OCATON Or ALL itaD(tPom w*(s. GBLM, OONOL m R1tii. Mu"q.[, vAIV(f Oat OMt p�¢oCO yrtaKTLYKS e(�Oaa( O P+[ OMTtACTOA SaaALL t(/Atll Ot sE1LACC TNC AWYY wwCN .. pWACED outtw tAaasraaLCrgN Ar aup Coy ro aat OYnaCt. %� f.,,�r�+' � tag. w:.� +r.H.�:�. •E t' CH fAS$EN n,rt 14 G'sy Waala< •t.w:ay"`�' " j "^: ks LOCATION MAP NO SCALE SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNERS SOIL `iESTIN13 •' ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 10580 WAYZATA BOULEVARD MINNETONKA, MINNESOTA 65305 SN£Ei IN= S. mu pm 2, COSTM CONOn*4 RAN S. VU PM CtVAMN PL*A-- rot XUV04= Orr,Y /. Tw ruseftAMN KP0- M t rtk"C ONLY S. ftxw il" 0% RAN S.. Pt(Lt lmw m D04 no- root RV(R(MCa[ ONLY 7. "!moan ovrk" Ulu" RAN. rot patio" ONLY a PAW $TMR &WN S(w(t • NA7RaaASd R/ua r ►tau S. PVKX Srolm av" RAN or mru 10. wtvxo MWAM04 PLAN IS O(rA1S IL LvcwJn RAN t7.. LANOSCN( MAU u"m PUN r NCt(W e(trsY "4' rHis PtAt wu tM►AtLO W M( Ot V.Ct W paa(OY SVa K Mip awrm kklm YK 4AA*$ a° WE T1 4 WLL L&VA MQ N0. CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVEDn(� S [[C P 0 6 2005 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT r ,»�� ! +tom f�p1s • t ')�y 1 . . . . •N�;• , .i. Of !{iASY wMyM/�:�`y �✓ Ji-.:..YY.: t} •.�' ., ' „• j , 'F'3 -� ��:••�•,•� .gin •: � � 1 �, � i � � S`�E�� 'f ��;[f ' ��, x�;��•� = I L 's • 0 IL ` i 4 / ca • 1 l 1 �� 1 I f ,� � � r_.. •� maim m �f t Ih l 3 7( . • ` I r I I Ly � : ►� E _� t[-urt• CtYCti kY�Z RX Ham lilt SA lip t q �y�,. kdf S S S c xte�s ss•.,'se • tpi-ri • � � i$ jxi 1i 'e r r i - � r it a 4Qg � 4 � L �� Y • I ; ti I _-1� iR r � r r � r r it Ri 9- i i ii � R �� '# � � � C�� Re t atI Ix g I s tx i _ / j Y � �� I4 gg �� aij s i �i� I s i R fill Rif lit 9f '� j � s s s • • ♦ f4 1XII, s' Jig ss y wg� F`i� I; 1' II€ I a R I} gt i!� s irY � �I��I � _ � � �:� t i r r f i PiI e: R �a r _� �4a jAll :i• .<�- }y!I fit, .• a . -L� ! PW N\ I �b .Q •` • y. W • 1 � ly . a 4dy Q 1 �. • y ,� j�� I � r '€ S_ COT'-sb•�}t"�1' f A Hi x�-' �� I : m� �a S ' p d - �I �I .�` .^?� it ,'•. ': i :', 11 ��O Xi •x 1 1` .. r I E� i}� •� lid •;� i 1 9 � O � ARBUR PARK iijil r A In if if I .tUT in 1 x g 2 ! C 1 Ng� - --�" i c o x �acomm NM / ` �i:::�:. ` '� ra�;�.�. ��f F �•:"�.a. i71 C p!^SJ.J.A i 1.:?i I v = ■ f'a . a • s . � . 1 I I � I j s � � �� t �� F# � � XX �� E�� €��Y lit, if "ssY g� alt XiX A R R A R > !a•3 T€ +Li* s ti iRl, iF l i F all I fig [till I NOT I V MUM M iR! 7 F - .� •'_±- � ,Ear g' ' —� � � 1 ....... s C �M..? Yu w� �•...wn �• tl tt ~�~ ` �R �t g ys •• _ i- Ali �� S Y" 1 al _ IRN { I 1111 I a _ . *6.0 ••b w� ad AAA EU- aZr� r Hi 11 ia� 1111H,, 111 =l§§a�.� I'XI III. Is Qq t fX s§�!§ll!!Q X i ex §T �I Ea as Jill!' i3jiall' I f §s a j §ss$ i 3 It £i aX :s �rEtXa �AXA3#1 ill€ F a ia3 j j = $� s § X tFX�• !ya,-ill!' X JilXs e� I3Ali . Mzwa.. ::4l3:FL'ii .�I j i paln��© i Uf ilr ,F: Ff1F ,917E "' c t. •� ,aa. u,n fig ' l a i � 4 N� 1(7 -7 o ter+ t i t A�' ��1jFu�.iti r i if JWL Not 4 1 = Mi �f :•, �� 1111 1i 1 ! 'fill , o I Yad 1� w� t _ i , l Fill � , 1 F Vof Erg r ' L '• '. w 10. • ' lP22!j1 ! rT�r�v r..s krS` -11 MIMP F :i5`p fr �� Ll F i �1� �• I;Ij f�W in 1� i= q F L t �E J� 1 us # } -i 1 f Yj.s j I :b laia } Iii �b�i.7a: `P°-9.d'�a ••'� d"t +.Je"�. "��4�+fR��ii��?�"" �4vNAMaa.4�6 Kill" Y �.`,�� ` � '�, i�s�s• rj�j i t fi ! � � j it :+ �. - d!�'"��R fill W. 7A� a _ - - � �� jilt * r► H�: a M_ ..• i f '�' y k iG��rrr .�awe awe awe awe awe awe v �RRyt � ,� �� t yam„ � ?• Affl .�� r 1 FF 114814re"Irs:.urrrrerr�ruu nrarw r ��i.s..!.4,�,f#i` W71". .. fief � ' r a F ; r, fill 11H ICI. M <� o K .. 911 fit t . 8 xY Od�OAQAQQBAQQ� ®QgaQ©©AQ8Q0©� 1 nManflo8©_dDoug i A u� i f s att>�er�.a+�r�xaarcu�t��oas t a 9 FF : F ► F 1! ■ r ax 39 s 11 Ell a *� a i E ■ x f _ � T r i § � A X1 n FtiY� •v �X; i • k lit ; .1 As I b i x;I� .0 ail Ai�Srr�aEa3 OL • �iN Sx a ill11 Ell lit a a?� iA fl IASI _t '! ill un- € p ti00.131a�0 Delals.d+y,4+6@D06 itSi7 P� Pal 1�.890SS _ H it fill ! t r s r • r r r r �T ��_ Y• 3= It fill Sol _ :figt 111ill I ?, aI ai ll E# ' if ,I IF � : ' , ; 3= €is r __ .r i=�i P qM ~ ■ 3@;ii ^a.txY P 38 f;f l�Y,{ge €f rY)E� F� ! 4rrdix` 6fi }�E{ T Lg[i_aF iiiii 151 f9 {€11,4 9gY1A# __ jA��i efx 1 7a 3=fli 3a . € F`gQiY € d.�5=•11".Yi afix, F�� a MN `3: i =� i 4�;! it =PI,ix p.iai aill I fit°ri t f�r. y� To � I � x� � t tp• '' ifa i, Ufa Yn I; a , ill. i _� u - r Y1 i ULJ - ' h t300.$1M1pPPANy 9 6f20D3t7A4 Pl1 Pa��, i� 636ib t 40 � s ZY '� resitfak +gd } 'rc e